ArticleHarm reduction journal2025
Highlighting variability in fentanyl test strip instructions using thematic content analysis.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characteristics of adverse reactions to kratom and implementation of harm reduction strategies in a sample of ethnobotanical tea bar patrons in Colorado.Harm reduction journal · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFentanyl test strips (FTS) are a harm reduction tool used by individuals seeking to avoid unintentional fentanyl exposure while consuming other illicit substances (e.g., heroin, cocaine). While evidence speaks to the efficacy and acceptability of FTS, there are currently no standardized instructions for the use of FTS as a drug checking tool, and little is known about potential variability across instructions.
methodsWe sought to investigate variability in content across FTS instructions (N = 16) through conducting a thematic content analysis of instructions listed in the first three pages of a Google search. The search was conducted in May of 2024, with "fentanyl test strip instructions" entered as the search term. To be included in the present analysis, the information listed in the search result must have contained explicit instructions for how to use FTS and have been printed in English.
resultsThematic content analysis of FTS instructions yielded 26 codes and 4 themes. Themes included (1) Information about FTS (2) Testing Methods (3) Test Results and (4) Additional Resources. Overall, results indicated considerable variability across the 16 instructions examined, with the greatest variability observed within the testing methods theme.
conclusionInconsistencies in online FTS instructions, such as those identified in the current study, could lead to distrust among people who use drugs and disengagement with this drug checking practice. Standardized and accessible instructions are critical to optimizing the efficacy of FTS as a harm reduction tool and reducing accidental fentanyl exposure.
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.