Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40484964›Full record

ReviewHarm reduction journal2025

U.S. substance use harm reduction efforts: a review of the current state of policy, policy barriers, and recommendations.

Bailey E Pridgen, Andrew P Bontemps, Audrey R Lloyd, William P Wagner, Emma S Kay, Ellen F Eaton, Karen L Cropsey

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 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Toward a solution-focused addiction science.Frontiers in public health · 2025
    Article
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.

Bailey E PridgenDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neurobiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1670 University Blvd., Volker Hall, Suite L107, Birmingham, AL, 35233, USA. bpridgen@uab.edu.
Andrew P BontempsDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA.
Audrey R LloydHeersink School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
William P WagnerDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neurobiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1670 University Blvd., Volker Hall, Suite L107, Birmingham, AL, 35233, USA.
Emma S KaySchool of Nursing, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Ellen F EatonHeersink School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Karen L CropseyDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neurobiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1670 University Blvd., Volker Hall, Suite L107, Birmingham, AL, 35233, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A wealth of research demonstrates that harm reduction interventions for substance use (SU) save lives and reduce risk for serious infectious diseases such as HIV, hepatitis C, and other SU-related health conditions. The U.S. has adopted several harm reduction interventions at federal and state levels to combat SU-related harm. While several policy changes on the federal and state levels decriminalized interventions and further support their use, other policies limit the reach of these interventions by delaying or restricting care, leaving access to life-saving interventions inconsistent across the U.S. Federal and state policies in the U.S. that restrict access to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), criminalize possession of drug paraphernalia, prevent syringe service programs and overdose prevention centers from operating, and limit prescribing of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) pose significant barriers to harm reduction access and implementation. This paper aims to bridge publications and reports on current state and federal harm reduction intervention policies and discuss policy recommendations. Federally, the DEA and SAMHSA should expand certification for methadone dispensing to settings beyond dedicated opioid treatment programs and non-OTP prescribers. Congress can decriminalize items currently categorized as paraphernalia, permit purchasing of syringes and all drug checking equipment using federal funds, amend the Controlled Substances Act to allow for expansion of overdose prevention centers, protect Medicaid coverage of PrEP, and expand Medicaid to cover residential SU treatment. At the state level, states can reduce regulations for prescribing MOUD and PrEP, decriminalize drug paraphernalia, codify Good Samaritan laws, and remove restrictions for syringe service program and overdose prevention center implementation. Lastly, states should expand Medicaid to allow broader access to treatment for SU and oppose Medicaid lock-outs based on current SU. These changes are needed as overdose deaths and serious infectious disease rates from SU continue to climb and impact American lives.

Indexed as

Harm ReductionHealth PolicySubstance-Related DisordersHealth Services AccessibilityHumansNeedle-Exchange ProgramsOpioid-Related DisordersUnited StatesDrug checking equipmentMedications for opioid use disorderNaloxoneOverdose prevention centersPre-exposure prophylaxisSyringe service programs

Identifiers

PMID40484964
PMCPMC12147315

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.