↓ Skip to main content

Why It's Inappropriate Not to Treat Incarcerated Patients with Opioid Agonist Therapy

Overview of attention for article published in AMA Journal of Ethics, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
118 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 Mendeley
Title
Why It's Inappropriate Not to Treat Incarcerated Patients with Opioid Agonist Therapy
Published in
AMA Journal of Ethics, September 2017
DOI 10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.9.stas1-1709
Pubmed ID
Abstract

Due to the criminalization of drug use and addiction, opioid use disorder is overrepresented in incarcerated populations. Decades of evidence supports opioid agonist therapy as a highly effective treatment that improves clinical outcomes and reduces illicit opioid use, overdose death, and cost. Opioid agonist therapy has been both studied within correctional facilities and initiated prerelease. It has been found to be beneficial, yet few incarcerated persons receive this evidence-based treatment. In addition to not offering treatment initiation for those who need it, most correctional facilities forcibly withdraw stable patients from opioid agonist therapy upon their entry into the criminal justice system. This approach limits their access to evidence-based health care and results in negative outcomes for individuals, communities, and society.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 118 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 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 19%
Student > Master 5 19%
Student > Bachelor 4 15%
Researcher 3 11%
Librarian 2 7%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 4 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 26%
Social Sciences 5 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 15%
Psychology 2 7%
Decision Sciences 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 5 19%