ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2026
Drug Checking Services in Latin America vs. the United States: Staff Perspectives, Program Characteristics, and Barriers to Implementation.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Drug checking services (DCS) promote drug supply awareness among people who use drugs (PWUD) by detecting adulterants such as fentanyl and xylazine that are associated with overdose morbidity and mortality. However, there is limited research on DCS implementation in Latin America (LA). Methods: We conducted a survey of 38 DCS across LA (n=10) and the US (n=28) and compared program characteristics and barriers between these two regions. We also conducted a focus group discussion (FGD) with staff representing six organizations implementing DCS in LA. FGD themes were mapped to constructs quantitatively assessed in the survey. Results: Compared to US DCS, LA DCS more frequently reported funding gaps as a major implementation barrier (80% vs. 54%), law enforcement confiscating DCS supplies (38% vs. 11%), as well as offering supervised drug consumption (30% vs. 4%) and mental health/counseling (40% vs. 18%), but less frequently reported that DCS equipment was legal (44% vs. 75%). DCS on the Mexico-US border focused on people who inject drugs and offered syringe services, supervised consumption, and rapid sexually transmitted infection testing. DCS in central Mexico, Colombia, Peru, and Chile primarily provided DCS for the nightlife community (e.g., attendees of concerts/raves). Barriers to DCS implementation cited by FGD discussants included inadequate funding, DCS legal ambiguities, lack of government support, and cartel violence. Conclusion: DCS in LA would benefit from increased funding, government support, and a more permissive legal environment, thereby strengthening harm reduction efforts and improving safety for PWUD.
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.