ArticleHarm reduction journal2025
"We've lost a lot of lives:" the impact of the closure of North America's busiest supervised consumption site on people who use substances and the organizations that work with them.
Article 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Overdose prevention site closure: A reply to Day et al.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2026Article
- A continuum of disconnection: the impacts of safer supply program closures on continuity of care, transition, and total loss of service access.Harm reduction journal · 2026Article
- A qualitative study of the impacts of a government crackdown against revenue sharing between pharmacies and patients in Vancouver, Canada.Discover public health · 2026Article
- Relational trust in outreach with women experiencing street-involvement in British Columbia, Canada: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSupervised Consumption Sites (SCS) are an evidence-based harm reduction intervention that reduces the risk of fatal drug poisonings. However, these approaches have faced political opposition in Canada, resulting in the closures of SCS in some provinces. Our study examines the aftermath of the closure of what was once North America's busiest SCS, located in Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada, offering a contextualized exploration of regressive drug policies.
methodsOur study adopts a descriptive qualitative design to explore the Lethbridge SCS closure and the city's current state of harm reduction service provision. We conducted 37 interviews to understand the perspectives of people who use substances (PWUS) and staff members of organizations that provide harm-reduction services in Lethbridge. We chose to use reflexive thematic analysis, which allows for a critical realist and contextual approach to data analysis.
resultsWe developed three themes based on our analysis. Our first theme speaks to the harms of SCS closures on PWUS and organizations that provide harm reduction services. Next, our second theme highlights participants' perspectives on the political motivations behind the SCS closure. Our last theme explores how PWUS and organizations navigate the political opposition to harm reduction approaches while responding to the worsening unregulated drug poisoning crisis.
conclusionsOur findings speak to the dangers of political decisions that restrict access to harm reduction services within the context of the current unregulated drug poisoning crisis.
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.