| Title |
Heroin-assisted Treatment (HAT) a Decade Later: A Brief Update on Science and Politics
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Urban Health, June 2007
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11524-007-9198-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Benedikt Fischer, Eugenia Oviedo-Joekes, Peter Blanken, Christian Haasen, Jürgen Rehm, Martin T. Schechter, John Strang, Wim van den Brink |
| Abstract |
Since the initial Swiss heroin-assisted treatment (HAT) study conducted in the mid-1990s, several other jurisdictions in Europe and North America have implemented HAT trials. All of these studies embrace the same goal-investigating the utility of medical heroin prescribing for problematic opioid users-yet are distinct in various key details. This paper briefly reviews (initiated or completed) studies and their main parameters, including primary research objectives, design, target populations, outcome measures, current status and-where available-key results. We conclude this overview with some final observations on a decade of intensive HAT research in the jurisdictions examined, including the suggestion that there is a mounting onus on the realm of politics to translate the-largely positive-data from completed HAT science into corresponding policy and programming in order to expand effective treatment options for the high-risk population of illicit opioid users. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 48 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 13 | 27% |
| Canada | 4 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 4 | 8% |
| Italy | 2 | 4% |
| Central African Republic | 1 | 2% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 23 | 48% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 46 | 96% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 2% |
| Scientists | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 129 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 2% |
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Canada | 2 | 2% |
| Unknown | 122 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 25 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 25 | 19% |
| Researcher | 18 | 14% |
| Other | 7 | 5% |
| Professor | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 25 | 19% |
| Unknown | 22 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 33 | 26% |
| Social Sciences | 20 | 16% |
| Psychology | 14 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 22 | 17% |
| Unknown | 29 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 116. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 February 2024.
All research outputs
#368,992
of 25,791,949 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Urban Health
#66
of 1,730 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#529
of 83,226 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Urban Health
#1
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,791,949 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,730 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 83,226 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them