Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40320763›Full record

ArticleDrug and alcohol review2025

Understanding Drug and Alcohol Staff Perspectives on the Barriers and Facilitators to Drug Checking: A Qualitative Study.

Nina Pocuca, Brodie C Dakin, Cheneal Puljević, Cameron Francis, Daniel Stjepanović, Anthony Barnett, Leanne Hides

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Drug and alcohol review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Interpol review of forensic drug chemistry, 2022-2025.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026
    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

7 authors.

Nina PocucaNational Centre for Youth Substance Use Research, School of Psychology, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Behavioural Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0264-1680
Brodie C DakinNational Centre for Youth Substance Use Research, School of Psychology, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Behavioural Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Cheneal PuljevićCentre of Research Excellence on Achieving the Tobacco Endgame, School of Public Health, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Behavioural Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3658-9772
Cameron FrancisThe Loop Australia, Brisbane, Australia.
Daniel StjepanovićNational Centre for Youth Substance Use Research, School of Psychology, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Behavioural Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4307-423X
Anthony BarnettNational Centre for Youth Substance Use Research, School of Psychology, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Behavioural Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2804-4585
Leanne HidesNational Centre for Youth Substance Use Research, School of Psychology, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Behavioural Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4550-8460

Funding

Australian Research Council DE230101131Department of Health and Aged Care, Australian GovernmentLives Lived WellNational Health and Medical Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDrug checking (i.e., whereby members of the public submit a drug sample for pharmacological analysis of the drug content) is an evidence-based harm reduction tool. Despite this, the uptake of drug checking services by people who use drugs (PWUD) is often limited across different jurisdictions and types of services, highlighting the need for research examining barriers to drug checking uptake from the perspective of key stakeholders. This qualitative pre-implementation study explored the perspectives of staff employed by alcohol and other drug (AOD) organisations on drug checking, including barriers and facilitators to uptake.

methodsInterviews were conducted with 23 AOD harm reduction and AOD treatment staff (14 female; mean age = 38.8 years, SD = 8.2). Qualitative data were analysed using iterative categorisation.

resultsFive themes were extracted from the data: (i) PWUD infrequently are most likely to access drug checking; (ii) Confidentiality and anonymity concerns are barriers to drug checking; (iii) Ease of use is integral to drug checking uptake; (iv) Safe, non-judgemental environments that include peer workers are critical; and (v) People who sell drugs will likely use drug checking. DISCUSSION AND

conclusionsThe following factors were identified as paramount to the uptake of drug checking services among PWUD: (i) confidentiality; (ii) agreements or memoranda of understanding that protect service clients from over-policing and criminalisation; (iii) mobile and fixed-site services that are accessible to PWUD; and (iv) a non-judgemental and safe environment that includes both health professionals and peer workers with lived experience.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelDrug UsersIllicit DrugsSubstance-Related DisordersAdultFemaleHarm ReductionHumansMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchIllicit Drugsalcohol and other drug staff perspectivesdrug checkingharm reductionpeople who use drugs

Identifiers

PMID40320763
PMCPMC12228017

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.