Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37667312›Full record

ArticleHarm reduction journal2023

Contextual factors affecting the implementation of drug checking for harm reduction: a scoping literature review from a North American perspective.

Chloe Grace Rose, Victoria Kulbokas, Emir Carkovic, Todd A Lee, A Simon Pickard

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Harm reduction journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Interpol review of forensic drug chemistry, 2022-2025.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Chloe Grace RoseDepartment of Pharmacy Systems, Outcomes, and Policy, University of Illinois Chicago, 833 S Wood St, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA.
Victoria KulbokasDepartment of Pharmacy Systems, Outcomes, and Policy, University of Illinois Chicago, 833 S Wood St, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA.
Emir CarkovicDepartment of Pharmacy Systems, Outcomes, and Policy, University of Illinois Chicago, 833 S Wood St, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA.
Todd A LeeDepartment of Pharmacy Systems, Outcomes, and Policy, University of Illinois Chicago, 833 S Wood St, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA.
A Simon PickardDepartment of Pharmacy Systems, Outcomes, and Policy, University of Illinois Chicago, 833 S Wood St, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA. pickard1@uic.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe opioid epidemic continues to be a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in the US. In 2020, 83% of opioid-related overdose deaths were due to synthetic opioids, such as fentanyl. Drug checking services have been widely implemented as a harm reduction intervention to facilitate the identification of substances in a drug sample. There is a need to inform decision-making on drug checking technologies and service implementation. This research aims to outline contextual considerations for the implementation of a drug checking service.

methodsA scoping review was conducted using a structured search strategy in PubMed and EMBASE. Articles were independently screened by two reviewers, and included if they were primary literature and reported on an actionable consideration(s) for drug checking services. Data elements were extracted using a standardized form, and included study design, study population, drug checking technology utilized or discussed, and main findings.

resultsTwenty-nine articles were selected for inclusion, and four primary areas of consideration were identified: drug checking technologies, venue of a drug checking service, legality, and privacy. Technological considerations include the need for highly accurate, quantitative results which appeal to both populations of people with drug use disorder and recreational users. Accessibility of services was identified as an important factor that may be impacted by the location, integration with other services, how the service is provided (mobile vs. fixed), and the hours of operation. Maintaining plausible deniability and building trust were seen as important facilitators to service use and engagement. Issues surrounding legality were the most frequently cited barrier by patrons, including fear of criminalization, policing, and surveillance. Patrons and stakeholders identified a need for supportive policies that offer protections. Maintaining anonymity for patrons is crucial to addressing privacy-related barriers.

conclusionThis review highlights the need to understand the local population and climate for drug checking to implement a drug checking service successfully. Common themes identified in the literature included considerations related to the choice of technology, the type of venue, and the impact of legality and privacy. We intend to utilize these considerations in future research to help guide discussions with US-based stakeholders.

Indexed as

Harm ReductionPharmaceutical PreparationsAnalgesics, OpioidHumansNorth AmericaOpiate OverdoseAnalgesics, OpioidPharmaceutical PreparationsDrug checkingDrug checking servicesDrug checking technologiesHarm reduction

Identifiers

PMID37667312
PMCPMC10478363

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.