• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

减少伤害方面的指南制定:关于服务使用者有意义参与的考量。

Guideline development in harm reduction: Considerations around the meaningful involvement of people who access services.

作者信息

Adams Alison, Ferguson Max, Greer Alissa M, Burmeister Charlene, Lock Kurt, McDougall Jenny, Scow Marnie, Buxton Jane A

机构信息

British Columbia Center for Disease Control, 655W 12th Avenue, Vancouver, BC V5Z 4R4, Canada.

School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, 2206 E Mall, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z8, Canada.

出版信息

Drug Alcohol Depend Rep. 2022 Aug 12;4:100086. doi: 10.1016/j.dadr.2022.100086. eCollection 2022 Sep.

DOI:10.1016/j.dadr.2022.100086
PMID:36846576
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9948926/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Harm reduction seeks to minimizes the negative effects of drug use while respecting the rights of people with lived and living experience of substance use (PWLLE). Guideline standards ("guidelines for guidelines") provide direction on developing healthcare guidelines. To identify essential considerations for guideline development within harm reduction, we examined whether guideline standards are consistent with a harm reduction approach in their recommendations on involving people who access services.

METHODS

We searched the literature from 2011-2021 to identify guideline standards used in harm reduction and publications on involving PWLLE in developing harm reduction services. We used thematic analysis to compare their guidance on involving people who access services. Findings were validated with two organizations of PWLLE.

RESULTS

Six guideline standards and 18 publications met inclusion criteria. We identified three themes related to involving people who access services: , and . Subthemes varied across the literature. We identified five essential considerations for guideline development in harm reduction: establishing a shared understanding of reasons for involving PWLLE; respecting their expertise; partnering with PWLLE to ensure appropriate engagement; incorporating perspectives of populations disproportionately affected by substance use; and securing resources.

CONCLUSION

Guideline standards and the harm reduction literature approach the involvement of people who access services from different perspectives. Thoughtful integration of the two paradigms can improve guidelines while empowering PWLLE. Our findings can support the development of high-quality guidelines that align with the fundamental principles of harm reduction in their involvement of PWLLE.

摘要

背景

减少伤害旨在将药物使用的负面影响降至最低,同时尊重有物质使用经历的人的权利(有物质使用经历的人)。指南标准(“指南的指南”)为制定医疗保健指南提供指导。为了确定减少伤害指南制定的基本考虑因素,我们研究了指南标准在关于让接受服务的人参与的建议方面是否与减少伤害方法一致。

方法

我们检索了2011年至2021年的文献,以确定减少伤害中使用的指南标准以及关于让有物质使用经历的人参与制定减少伤害服务的出版物。我们使用主题分析来比较它们在让接受服务的人参与方面的指导。研究结果由两个有物质使用经历的人组织进行了验证。

结果

六项指南标准和18篇出版物符合纳入标准。我们确定了与让接受服务的人参与相关的三个主题: ,以及 。各文献中的子主题各不相同。我们确定了减少伤害指南制定的五个基本考虑因素:就让有物质使用经历的人参与的原因达成共同理解;尊重他们的专业知识;与有物质使用经历的人合作以确保适当参与;纳入受物质使用影响不成比例的人群的观点;以及确保资源。

结论

指南标准和减少伤害文献从不同角度探讨了让接受服务的人参与的问题。对这两种范式进行深思熟虑的整合可以改进指南,同时增强有物质使用经历的人的权能。我们的研究结果可以支持制定高质量的指南,这些指南在让有物质使用经历的人参与方面符合减少伤害的基本原则。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/fb30/9948926/8801c5263eb6/gr3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/fb30/9948926/5c30b9b4db24/gr1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/fb30/9948926/603c8c288f0a/gr2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/fb30/9948926/8801c5263eb6/gr3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/fb30/9948926/5c30b9b4db24/gr1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/fb30/9948926/603c8c288f0a/gr2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/fb30/9948926/8801c5263eb6/gr3.jpg

相似文献

1
Guideline development in harm reduction: Considerations around the meaningful involvement of people who access services.减少伤害方面的指南制定:关于服务使用者有意义参与的考量。
Drug Alcohol Depend Rep. 2022 Aug 12;4:100086. doi: 10.1016/j.dadr.2022.100086. eCollection 2022 Sep.
2
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
3
Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.超越黑木树:影响澳大利亚地区、农村和偏远地区的健康研究问题的快速综述。
Med J Aust. 2020 Dec;213 Suppl 11:S3-S32.e1. doi: 10.5694/mja2.50881.
4
Beyond the 5-year recovery mark: Perspectives of researchers with lived and living experience on public engagement and discourse.超越 5 年的康复期:具有生活和生存经验的研究人员对公众参与和讨论的看法。
Int J Drug Policy. 2024 Nov;133:104599. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2024.104599. Epub 2024 Sep 27.
5
Right care, first time: a highly personalised and measurement-based care model to manage youth mental health.精准医疗,首次就诊:高度个性化和基于评估的青少年心理健康管理医疗模式。
Med J Aust. 2019 Nov;211 Suppl 9:S3-S46. doi: 10.5694/mja2.50383.
6
Patient involvement in guidelines is poor five years after institute of medicine standards: review of guideline methodologies.在医学研究所制定标准五年后,患者在指南中的参与度仍然很低:指南方法学综述
Res Involv Engagem. 2017 Oct 2;3:19. doi: 10.1186/s40900-017-0070-2. eCollection 2017.
7
Organizational support for frontline harm reduction and systems navigation work among workers with living and lived experience: qualitative findings from British Columbia, Canada.组织对具有生活和生存经验的一线减少伤害和系统导航工作的支持:来自加拿大不列颠哥伦比亚省的定性研究结果。
Harm Reduct J. 2021 Jun 5;18(1):60. doi: 10.1186/s12954-021-00507-2.
8
Peer driven or driven peers? A rapid review of peer involvement of people who use drugs in HIV and harm reduction services in low- and middle-income countries.同伴驱动还是驱动同伴?对中低收入国家中吸毒者在艾滋病毒和减少伤害服务中参与同伴工作的快速审查。
Harm Reduct J. 2021 Feb 3;18(1):15. doi: 10.1186/s12954-021-00461-z.
9
Understanding the needs of local youth to inform drug and alcohol prevention and harm reduction services: A qualitative study.了解当地青年的需求,为毒品和酒精预防及减少伤害服务提供信息:一项定性研究。
Health Promot J Austr. 2021 Jul;32(3):416-424. doi: 10.1002/hpja.393. Epub 2020 Aug 28.
10
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.

引用本文的文献

1
Mapping experiences of workplace stigma and discrimination within the lived-living experience of illicit drug use and bloodborne virus peer workforce: a scoping review.在非法药物使用和血源性病毒同伴工作队伍的生活经历中映射工作场所的耻辱感和歧视经历:一项范围审查。
Harm Reduct J. 2025 Jul 25;22(1):127. doi: 10.1186/s12954-025-01282-0.
2
HIV Prevention Among People Who Inject Drugs (PWID): A Narrative Review.注射吸毒者中的艾滋病病毒预防:一篇叙述性综述。
Cureus. 2025 Jun 10;17(6):e85719. doi: 10.7759/cureus.85719. eCollection 2025 Jun.
3
Improving measures of context in process evaluations: development and use of the Context Tracker tool.

本文引用的文献

1
Challenges in applying the GRADE approach in public health guidelines and systematic reviews: a concept article from the GRADE Public Health Group.在公共卫生指南和系统评价中应用 GRADE 方法的挑战:来自 GRADE 公共卫生组的概念文章。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2021 Jul;135:42-53. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.01.001. Epub 2021 Jan 18.
2
Use of Patient Preference Information in Benefit-Risk Assessment, Health Technology Assessment, and Pricing and Reimbursement Decisions: A Systematic Literature Review of Attempts and Initiatives.患者偏好信息在获益-风险评估、卫生技术评估及定价与报销决策中的应用:对相关尝试与举措的系统文献综述
Front Med (Lausanne). 2020 Oct 26;7:543046. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2020.543046. eCollection 2020.
3
改进过程评估中的情境度量措施:情境追踪工具的开发与应用。
Trials. 2024 Nov 18;25(1):777. doi: 10.1186/s13063-024-08623-7.
4
Using digital technology to reduce drug-related harms: a targeted service users' perspective of the Digital Lifelines Scotland programme.利用数字技术减少药物相关危害:苏格兰数字生命线计划的目标服务用户视角。
Harm Reduct J. 2024 Jul 1;21(1):128. doi: 10.1186/s12954-024-01012-y.
5
Digital Interventions for Recreational Cannabis Use Among Young Adults: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Behavior Change Technique Analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies.数字干预措施对年轻人娱乐性大麻使用的影响:随机对照研究的系统评价、荟萃分析和行为改变技术分析。
J Med Internet Res. 2024 Apr 17;26:e55031. doi: 10.2196/55031.
6
[Not Available].[无可用内容]。
CMAJ. 2023 Oct 3;195(38):E1312-E1325. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.230128-f.
7
Guidance on take-home naloxone distribution and use by community overdose responders in Canada.加拿大社区过量反应者携带纳洛酮分发和使用指南
CMAJ. 2023 Aug 28;195(33):E1112-E1123. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.230128.
8
Priority setting for Canadian Take-Home Naloxone best practice guideline development: an adapted online Delphi method.加拿大带药回家纳洛酮最佳实践指南制定的优先事项设定:一种经改编的在线德尔菲法。
Harm Reduct J. 2022 Jul 2;19(1):71. doi: 10.1186/s12954-022-00650-4.
How do guideline developers identify, incorporate and report patient preferences? An international cross-sectional survey.
指南制定者如何识别、纳入和报告患者偏好?一项国际横断面调查。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 May 24;20(1):458. doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-05343-x.
4
Considerations of complexity in rating certainty of evidence in systematic reviews: a primer on using the GRADE approach in global health.系统评价中证据确定性评级的复杂性考量:全球卫生领域使用GRADE方法入门指南
BMJ Glob Health. 2019 Jan 25;4(Suppl 1):e000848. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000848. eCollection 2019.
5
Peer engagement barriers and enablers: insights from people who use drugs in British Columbia, Canada.同伴参与的障碍和促进因素:来自加拿大不列颠哥伦比亚省的吸毒者的见解。
Can J Public Health. 2019 Apr;110(2):227-235. doi: 10.17269/s41997-018-0167-x. Epub 2019 Jan 4.
6
Incorporating patients' views in guideline development: a systematic review of guidance documents.将患者观点纳入指南制定:对指导文件的系统评价
J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Aug;88:102-112. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.05.018. Epub 2017 Jun 1.
7
Peer engagement in harm reduction strategies and services: a critical case study and evaluation framework from British Columbia, Canada.同伴参与减少伤害策略与服务:来自加拿大不列颠哥伦比亚省的一项关键案例研究及评估框架
BMC Public Health. 2016 May 27;16:452. doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-3136-4.
8
Scoping the shape of an iceberg: the future of public involvement in heath policy: reflecting on 'Public involvement policies in health: exploring their conceptual basis'.审视冰山一角:公众参与健康政策的未来:反思《健康领域的公众参与政策:探索其概念基础》
Health Econ Policy Law. 2015 Oct;10(4):381-5. doi: 10.1017/S1744133115000092. Epub 2015 May 14.
9
Patient and public involvement: how much do we spend and what are the benefits?患者及公众参与:我们投入了多少,又有哪些益处?
Health Expect. 2015 Dec;18(6):1918-26. doi: 10.1111/hex.12204. Epub 2014 May 12.
10
Current experience with applying the GRADE approach to public health interventions: an empirical study.目前将 GRADE 方法应用于公共卫生干预措施的经验:一项实证研究。
BMC Public Health. 2013 Jan 8;13:9. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-9.