ArticleSubstance use & addiction journal2026
Feasibility and Acceptability of Restroom Motion Sensors for Detecting Overdoses.
Article in Substance use & addiction journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMost US drug use events that lead to a fatal overdose are unwitnessed. Given the scale of the overdose crisis, interventions to help detect and respond to overdoses in community settings are urgently needed. Overdose detection technologies (ODT), including reverse-motion restroom sensors, are a promising set of interventions that are underutilized. This study explored the perspectives of frontline harm reduction workers, clinicians, housing shelter staff, and their clients on restroom sensors.
methodsStaff and program client focus groups conducted between December 2022 and January 2024 discussed prior experiences of responding to overdoses and existing organizational overdose policies and procedures. A verbal and visual description of restroom sensors was given and supplemented with brief captioned educational videos to assess the feasibility and acceptability of restroom sensor implementation.
resultsWe conducted N = 8 discussions (n = 40 participants total). Staff described the anxiety and cognitive burden of monitoring client restrooms and the trauma of witnessing and responding to overdoses. Sites varied in their safety procedures, ranging from manual door knocks every 5 minutes to every 24 hours. Participants embraced the prospect of restroom sensor implementation in community drop-in centers, housing programs, and public restrooms (eg, food service). Perceived benefits of restroom sensors, in addition to saving lives, included the low-threshold and automated nature of the technologies and potential reductions in stress, anxiety, and trauma. However, participants shared concerns surrounding data confidentiality, potential legal repercussions of being found onsite after overdosing (eg, loss of housing, job, children, freedom), stigmatizing attitudes among first responders, reactions to ODTs among clients who mistrust technologies, corporations, and the government, staff fatigue, and technology maintenance.
conclusionOur findings demonstrated high acceptability of ODTs among staff and patients but revealed several programmatic and policy considerations that could support future implementation efforts.
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.