Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40448147›Full record

ReviewHarm reduction journal2025

Rural community-based participatory research with families of people who use drugs: key considerations from a multi-provincial research partnership.

Holly Mathias, Elsie Duff, Petra Schulz, Sarah Auger, Antoinette Gravel-Ouellette, Teresa Lockhart, Willi McCorriston, Jenn McCrindle, Nyal Mirza, Em Pijl and 2 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Harm reduction journal, 2025. 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. Review
  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

12 authors.

Holly MathiasSchool of Public Health, University of Alberta, Room 3-300 Edmonton Clinic Health Academy, 11405 87 Ave NW, Edmonton, AB, T6G 1C9, Canada. hmathias@ualberta.ca.
Elsie DuffCollege of Nursing, Helen Glass Centre for Nursing, University of Manitoba, 89 Curry Place, Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3T 2N2, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8148-6054
Petra SchulzMoms Stop the Harm, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Sarah AugerFaculty of Education, University of Alberta, 11210 87 Ave NW, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2G5, Canada.
Antoinette Gravel-OuelletteMoms Stop the Harm, Brandon, Manitoba, Canada.
Teresa LockhartFamily Community Research Partner, Manitoba, Canada, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Willi McCorristonMoms Stop the Harm, Kindersley, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Jenn McCrindleRECLAIM Collective, Alberta, Canada.
Nyal MirzaSchool of Public Health, University of Alberta, Room 3-300 Edmonton Clinic Health Academy, 11405 87 Ave NW, Edmonton, AB, T6G 1C9, Canada.
Em PijlCollege of Nursing, Helen Glass Centre for Nursing, University of Manitoba, 89 Curry Place, Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3T 2N2, Canada.
Tyla SavardStronger Together Canada, Moms Stop the Harm, Grand Prairie, AB, Canada.
Elaine HyshkaSchool of Public Health, University of Alberta, Room 3-300 Edmonton Clinic Health Academy, 11405 87 Ave NW, Edmonton, AB, T6G 1C9, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNorth America continues to contend with an unregulated drug crisis that is impacting communities of all sizes. Community-based participatory research that meaningfully engages people who use drugs, families, and their wider communities is one way of advancing social justice and improving population health. As more community-academic partnerships are formed in this space, some organizations have launched guidelines and considerations for engaging in community-based participatory research (CBPR). However, to our knowledge, none provide guidance for engaging in CBPR with people who use drugs and their families in rural settings. MAIN BODY: This paper presents insights gained from our experiences collaborating to conduct CBPR with families providing unpaid support for people who use drugs in rural Canada. Key considerations are thematically organized in four sections: Dreaming (Building the team and setting a vision), Designing (Key definitions, budget and ethical consideration), Doing (Bringing research to life), and Disseminating (Moving research into action).

conclusionsBy building on existing principles and guidelines for working with PWUD and their families, these considerations will be a valuable resource for other partnerships seeking to engage in community-based participatory substance use research in rural settings.

Indexed as

Community-Based Participatory ResearchFamilyRural PopulationSubstance-Related DisordersCanadaHumansCanadaCommunity-based participatory researchFamilyRuralUnregulated drug crisis

Identifiers

PMID40448147
PMCPMC12124088

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.