Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39617904›Full record

ReviewHarm reduction journal2024

People who use drugs and the right to health.

Alison Ritter, Liz Barrett

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Harm reduction journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

2 authors.

Alison RitterDrug Policy Modelling Program, Social Policy Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. alison.ritter@unsw.edu.au.
Liz BarrettDrug Policy Modelling Program, Social Policy Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council GNT2016695
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Support for a human rights framework for drug policy has been growing for some years. This year, the UNODC published a chapter in the World Drug Report focussed on the right to health. In this paper, we draw attention to the conceptualisation of the right to health for people who use drugs. While one essential element is access to appropriate, high quality, and affordable healthcare, this needs to occur hand-in-hand with two other central components of the right to health - the right to conditions that promote health (the social, economic, legal, commercial, and cultural determinants of health) and the right to meaningful participation in healthcare decisions and in health policy. We consider these three components of a right to health against the current international drug control regime. More specifically we point to how the three drug conventions (1966 as amended 1972, 1971 and 1988) make explicit mention of the right to health. In this way, we argue that duties to respect, protect and provide the right to health for people who use drugs accrue through being a signatory to the drug conventions. Given that there does not appear to be international appetite to abandon the current treaties, and notwithstanding the strong impression that they reinforce a criminalisation approach to people who use drugs, the work herein may afford another avenue for effective advocacy about the right to health.

Indexed as

Right to HealthDrug and Narcotic ControlDrug UsersGlobal HealthHealth PolicyHealth Services AccessibilityHuman RightsHumansSubstance-Related DisordersConventionsHuman rightsPeople who use drugsRight to healthTreaties

Identifiers

PMID39617904
PMCPMC11610087

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.