Evaluation of an emergency safe supply drugs and managed alcohol program in COVID-19 isolation hotel shelters for people experiencing homelessness

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2022.01.14.22269074: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Ethicsnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Analysis: We used Microsoft Excel for data management and to calculate summary statistics and R 3.6.3 for data visualizations.
    Microsoft Excel
    suggested: (Microsoft Excel, RRID:SCR_016137)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).


    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Our study has important limitations. First, as the decision was made to offer all shelter residents this program for drug and alcohol withdrawal management, there is no control group of residents without this program to compare rates of adverse events or resident-initiated premature discharge from the isolation shelters against public advice. Nevertheless, the rate of premature discharge was lower here than reported in San Francisco, and our findings here of relatively safety are reassuring. Second, as our study relied on retrospective evaluation of medical records, we may be missing data on events (including medication diversion, sharing, or selling) that were not disclosed to shelter staff. The program described here did not have a systemic approach to surveillance or of gathering information on diversion, sharing, or selling from shelter staff. Other study designs, including qualitative interviews, could be used to get a better sense of the scale of medication diversion, sharing, and selling, that was not reported back to the medical team. Third, as our study occurred in a city with relatively little fentanyl and crystal methamphetamine use, the dosing ranges here may not be sufficient in populations with higher drug tolerance and this may limit generalizability.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.


    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.


    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.