Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41888786›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2026

Access to health and harm reduction services during drug decriminalization in British Columbia, Canada: a mixed-method study.

Benjamin D Scher, Becca Wood, Naomi Zakimi, Mieke Fraser, Alexis Crabtree, Kaitlin Fajber, Brooke Kinniburgh, O Kara Loewen, Alissa Greer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors.

Benjamin D ScherSchool of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University, Princeton, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3331-0238
Becca WoodSchool of Criminology, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6423-2271
Naomi ZakimiSchool of Criminology, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3582-3261
Mieke FraserBC Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-9577-0297
Alexis CrabtreeBC Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1876-4354
Kaitlin FajberBC Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0007-9180-1215
Brooke KinniburghBC Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-2115-1193
O Kara LoewenBC Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4042-0275
Alissa GreerSchool of Criminology, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, BC, Canada. alissa_greer@sfu.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8702-5694

Funding

Canadian Institutes for Health Research Project Grant (202303PJT)Michael Smith Health Scholar Award (SCH-2022-2696)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOn January 31st 2023, the Canadian province of British Columbia temporarily decriminalized the personal possession of certain illegal drugs up to 2.5 g, cumulatively, for adults. A stated aim of this policy directive was to reduce the stigmatization of people who use drugs and increase access to health and harm reduction services. The aim of this study was to capture the prevalence and nature of potential barriers to such services under drug decriminalization.

methodsWe employed a mixed-methods study design, triangulating survey data from harm reduction service users in 2022 (n = 503) and 2023 (n = 433) alongside qualitative interviews with people who use drugs in British Columbia (n = 78) collected in 2023. Qualitative and quantitative findings were analysed convergently.

resultsFindings across both datasets suggest that reported barriers to health and harm reduction services persisted during British Columbia’s decriminalization pilot. Quantitative and qualitative data reflecting these barriers are presented in parallel under four themes: (1) stigma and fear of substance use disclosure, (2) stigma and access to services, (3) service-specific barriers, and (4) police-related barriers.

conclusionDecriminalization alone may be insufficient to address and/or mitigate the barriers that continue to constrain people who use drugs’ access to care. If the policy goal is to reduce barriers to health and harm reduction services, additional structural and institutional supports may be required.

Indexed as

Harm ReductionHealth Services AccessibilityIllicit DrugsSubstance-Related DisordersAdultBritish ColumbiaFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleQualitative ResearchSocial StigmaIllicit DrugsBarriersDrug decriminalizationHarm reductionHealth servicesMixed-methodsPoliceStigma

Identifiers

PMID41888786
PMCPMC13200392

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.