ArticleDrug and alcohol dependence reports2024
Evaluating the effects of supervised consumption sites on housing prices in Montreal, Canada using interrupted time series and hedonic price models.
Article in Drug and alcohol dependence reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Overdose Prevention Centers and Neighborhood Commercial Activity in New York City.JAMA network open · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In 2017, three brick and mortar supervised consumption sites (SCS) opened in Montreal, Canada. Opponents argued the sites would attract people who use drugs and reduce local real estate prices. Methods: We used interrupted time series and hedonic price models to evaluate the effects of Montreal's SCS on local real estate prices. We linked the Quebec Professional Association of Real Estate Brokers' housing sales data provided by Centris Inc. with census tract data and gentrification scores. Homes sold within 200 m of the SCS locations between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2021 were included. We adjusted for internal (e.g., number of bed/bathrooms, unit size) and external attributes (e.g., neighbourhood demographics), and included a spatio-temporal lag to account for correlation between sales. For sensitivity analysis we used site-specific dummy variables to better account for unmeasured neighbourhood differences, and repeated analyses using 500 m and 1000 m radii. Results: We observed a price shock after the opening of the first two SCS in June 2017 (level effect: -10.5%, 95% CI: -19.1%, -1.1%) but prices rose faster month-to-month (trend effect: 1.1%, 95% CI: 0.7%, 1.6%) after implementation. Following the implementation of the third site in November 2017 there was no immediate impact (level effect: 2.4%, 95% CI: -10.4%, 17.0%) but once more prices roses faster (0.9%, 95% CI: 0.4%, 1.5%) thereafter. When we replaced neighbourhood attributes with a site-specific dummy variable, we observed the same pattern. Sales' prices dropped (level effect: -9.6%, 95% CI: -15.0%, -3.8%) but rose faster month-to-month (trend effect: 0.9%, 95% CI: 0.6%, 1.2%) following June 2017's SCS implementations, with no level effect (4.9%, 95% CI: -7.3%, 18.6%) and a positive trend (0.9%, 95% CI: 0.5%, 1.3%) after November 2017's SCS opening. In most 500 m and 1000 m radii models, there were no immediate shocks following SCS opening, however, positive trend effects persisted in all models. Conclusion: Our models suggest homes sold near SCS may experience a price shock immediately post-implementation, with evidence of market recovery in the months that follow.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.