↓ Skip to main content

Supervised injection facilities in Canada: past, present, and future

Overview of attention for article published in Harm Reduction Journal, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#30 of 524)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
72 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
3 Google+ users
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
162 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Supervised injection facilities in Canada: past, present, and future
Published in
Harm Reduction Journal, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12954-017-0154-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas Kerr, Sanjana Mitra, Mary Clare Kennedy, Ryan McNeil

Abstract

Canada has long contended with harms arising from injection drug use. In response to epidemics of HIV infection and overdose in Vancouver in the mid-1990s, a range of actors advocated for the creation of supervised injection facilities (SIFs), and after several unsanctioned SIFs operated briefly and closed, Canada's first sanctioned SIF opened in 2003. However, while a large body of evidence highlights the successes of this SIF in reducing the health and social harms associated with injection drug use, extraordinary efforts were needed to preserve it, and continued activism by local people who inject drugs (PWID) and healthcare providers was needed to promote further innovation and address gaps in SIF service delivery. A growing acceptance of SIFs and increasing concern about overdose have since prompted a rapid escalation in efforts to establish SIFs in cities across Canada. While much progress has been made in that regard, there is a pressing need to create a more enabling environment for SIFs through amendment of federal legislation. Further innovation in SIF programming should also be encouraged through the creation of SIFs that accommodate assisted injecting, the inhalation of drugs. As well, peer-run, mobile, and hospital-based SIFs also constitute next steps needed to optimize the impact of this form of harm reduction intervention.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 72 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 162 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Unknown 161 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 55 34%
Student > Bachelor 38 23%
Unspecified 24 15%
Researcher 12 7%
Other 10 6%
Other 23 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 35 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 33 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 27 17%
Social Sciences 22 14%
Psychology 12 7%
Other 33 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 74. 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 31 October 2019.
All research outputs
#235,934
of 13,751,412 outputs
Outputs from Harm Reduction Journal
#30
of 524 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,270
of 264,291 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Harm Reduction Journal
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,751,412 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 524 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 94% 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 264,291 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 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