ReviewSubstance abuse and rehabilitation2026
Emergency Department Peer Recovery Support Services for Individuals with Substance Use Disorders: A Systematic Review of Comparative Studies.
Review in Substance abuse and rehabilitation, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Individuals with substance use disorders (SUDs) access care through emergency departments (EDs) more frequently than the general population, representing a critical opportunity for addiction treatment linkage. Peer recovery support services (PRSS) utilize individuals with lived recovery experience to provide peer support for those struggling with addiction. This service may be particularly helpful in the ED, where prior negative experiences can erode patient trust and care often involves extended waiting periods during which motivation can fluctuate. PRSS may enhance engagement in this setting by offering relationship-based support from someone who patients can identify with and who can provide practical information on service navigation. We conducted a systematic review of comparative studies evaluating ED-based PRSS for individuals with SUDs versus a non-PRSS comparator (eg, usual care). A medical librarian searched the literature through 8/2025; 1,801 citations were retrieved, 708 duplicates were removed, 1,093 records were screened, and 127 studies underwent full-text review. Nine studies published between 2011 and 2025, representing 14,883 unique individuals, met inclusion criteria. Most (seven) were considered moderate regarding global risk of bias. Types of substance and outcomes varied by study; opioids (n=7) were the most commonly evaluated substance, while overdose (n=6), all-cause hospital return (n=3), all-cause mortality (n=3), and SUD treatment linkage (n=3) were the most commonly evaluated outcomes. The findings were mixed; PRSS has not yet demonstrated clear superiority over non-PRSS comparators, though this may evolve as research continues. Consisting solely of quantitative studies, the present review fails to capture the qualitative patient experience of working with a peer, which may have been a positive, recovery-promoting encounter, even in the absence of statistical significance. While ED-based PRSS interventions are individualized services that promote connection and may increase patient comfort, the current evidence base remains heterogeneous, limited in comparative studies, and subject to bias.
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.