Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41613410›Full record

ArticleContemporary drug problems2025

An Examination of How People Who Use Drugs Conceptualize the Benefits and Drawbacks of Using Overdose Prevention Centers.

David Frank, Alex S Bennett, Luther Elliott, Joy D Scheidell, Suzan M Walters, Charles M Cleland

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Contemporary drug problems, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

6 authors.

David FrankDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, School of Global Public Health, New York University, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3304-3237
Alex S BennettDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, School of Global Public Health, New York University, New York, NY, USA.
Luther ElliottDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, School of Global Public Health, New York University, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5258-7438
Joy D ScheidellCenter for Drug Use and HIV/HCV Research, School of Global Public Health, New York University, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5504-149X
Suzan M WaltersCenter for Drug Use and HIV/HCV Research, School of Global Public Health, New York University, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2975-2893
Charles M ClelandCenter for Drug Use and HIV/HCV Research, School of Global Public Health, New York University, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6931-9904

Funding

Transdisciplinary Theoretical Svnthesis and Development CoreP30DA011041 · NIDA · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY · PI Holly Hagan · 1998 to 2026
$38.9M
Overdose Risk Management and Compensation in the Era of NaloxoneR01DA046653 · NIDA · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY · PI BENNETT, ALEXANDER S, ELLIOTT, LUTHER · 2018 to 2022
$4.4M
Evaluation of a community-based education, navigation, and support (CENS) intervention to reduce opioid-related harms among military veteransR01DA052426 · NIDA · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY · PI BENNETT, ALEXANDER S, ELLIOTT, LUTHER · 2021 to 2025
$3.4M
NIDA NIH HHS P30 DA011041NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA046653NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA052426
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: In 2021, NYC implemented overdose prevention center (OPC) services at two existing syringe exchange programs, allowing people to use pre-obtained drugs on-site. Although OPCs in Canada, Western Europe, and Australia have demonstrated their feasibility and benefits towards reducing overdose risk and drug-related harm, there is less data on how people who use drugs (PWUD) conceptualize the benefits and any potential drawbacks of using OPCs. Methods: In June-August 2022, we conducted 26 semistructured interviews with people in New York City who used unprescribed opioids. Interviews lasted 30-60 min and were conducted remotely using Zoom and later transcribed by a professional service. Data were then coded, using AtlasTi, into meaningful categories using a thematic approach based on the aims of the study and existing literature. Results: Most participants had heard of OnPoint and reported a willingness to use it. They described the ability of OnPoint staff to reverse an overdose quickly and the presence of naloxone, oxygen, and other supplies as the primary benefits. Yet, many also noted that OPCs provide PWUD with a place to escape from the weather and/or avoid law enforcement. Participants also reported concerns about how far PWUD would be willing to travel or wait to use an OPC and for the autonomy of PWUD in the context of formal, sanctioned OPCs. Conclusions: Results suggest that many PWUD in NYC are well-informed about OnPoint and are willing to use OPCs. Yet, to fulfil their potential, OPCs must be located near to where PWUD live, and should be made as low-threshold as possible. However, since it is unlikely that OPCs will be expanded enough to meet the need and because some PWUD will never choose to use in sanctioned OPCs, expanding the reach of alternative strategies, such as Mobile Overdose Response Services, is recommended.

Indexed as

harm reductionOnPointoverdoseoverdose prevention center (OPC)

Identifiers

PMID41613410
PMCPMC12851624

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.