CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 57HIV, Drug Use, Sexual RiskHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Greater Drug Injecting Risk for HIV, HBV, and HCV Infection in a City Where Syringe Exchange and Pharmacy Syringe Distribution are Illegal

Open access
Neaigus, Alan, Zhao, Mingfang, Gyarmathy, V. Anna, Cisek, Linda, Friedman, Samuel R., Baxter, Robert C.·2008·Journal of Urban Health
DOI 10.1007/s11524-008-9271-1PMC PMC2329750
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Comparing drug-injecting risk between cities that differ in the legality of sterile syringe distribution for injection drug use provides a natural experiment to assess the efficacy of legalizing sterile syringe distribution as a structural intervention to prevent human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and other parenterally transmitted infections among injection drug users (IDUs). This study compares the parenteral risk for HIV and hepatitis B (HBV) and C (HCV) infection among IDUs in Newark, NJ, USA, where syringe distribution programs were illegal during the period when data were collected, and New York City (NYC) where they were legal. IDUs were nontreatment recruited, 2004-2006, serotested, and interviewed about syringe sources and injecting risk behaviors (prior 30 days). In multivariate logistic regression, adjusted odds ratios (AOR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for city differences are estimated controlling for potential city confounders. IDUs in Newark (n = 214) vs. NYC (n = 312) were more likely to test seropositive for HIV (26% vs. 5%; AOR = 3.2; 95% CI = 1.6, 6.1), antibody to the HBV core antigen (70% vs. 27%; AOR = 4.4; 95% CI = 2.8, 6.9), and antibody to HCV (82% vs. 53%; AOR = 3.0; 95% CI = 1.8, 4.9), were less likely to obtain syringes from syringe exchange programs or pharmacies (AOR = 0.004; 95% CI = 0.001, 0.01), and were more likely to obtain syringes from street sellers (AOR = 74.0; 95% CI = 29.9, 183.2), to inject with another IDU's used syringe (AOR = 2.3; 95% CI = 1.1, 5.0), to reuse syringes (AOR = 2.99; 95% CI = 1.63, 5.50), and to not always inject once only with a new, sterile syringe that had been sealed in a wrapper (AOR = 5.4; 95% CI = 2.9, 10.3). In localities where sterile syringe distribution is illegal, IDUs are more likely to obtain syringes from unsafe sources and to engage in injecting risk behaviors. Legalizing and rapidly implementing sterile syringe distribution programs are critical for reducing parenterally transmitted HIV, HBV, and HCV among IDUs.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11524-008-9271-1

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Sex trafficking and substance use coercion disproportionately affect females.

    “Sex trafficking and substance use coercion disproportionately impact females.”

    From The ASAM/AAAP Clinical Practice Guideline on the Management of Stimulant Use Disorder (2024) · cites this paper as [213]

    The Sampling and Recruitment passage describes a study of HIV and hepatitis risk among people who inject drugs and their sex partners, but does not address sex trafficking or substance-use coercion. Further searches for those terms and for female or gender differences found no passage supporting the claim. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Cisgender and transgender women are significantly more likely to engage in sex work, which increases their risk of victimization.

    “Further, both cisand transgender women are significantly more likely to participate in sex work, which increases risk for victimization.”

    From The ASAM/AAAP Clinical Practice Guideline on the Management of Stimulant Use Disorder (2024) · cites this paper as [213]

    The Results and Table 1 report injecting risks and participants’ demographic characteristics, but do not compare cisgender and transgender women’s participation in sex work or discuss victimization from sex work. Searches of the full-text copy for “transgender,” “sex work,” and “victimization” found no passage addressing the claim. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 51

  1. Des Jarlais DC, Marmor M, Paone D, et al. HIV incidence among injecting drug users in New York City syringe-exchange programmes. Lancet. 1996;348(9033):987–991. · DOI
  2. Bluthenthal RN, Kral AH, Gee L, Erringer EA, Edlin BR. The effect of syringe exchange use on high-risk injection drug users: a cohort study. AIDS. 2000;14(5):605–611. · DOI
  3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Update: syringe exchange programs—United States, 2002. Morb Mort Wkly Rep. 2005;54(27):673–676.
  4. Bailey SL, Huo D, Garfein RS, Ouellet LJ. The use of needle exchange by young injection drug users. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2003;34(1):67–70. · DOI
  5. Hagan H, Des Jarlais DC, Friedman SR, Purchase D, Alter MJ. Reduced risk of Hepatitis B and Hepatitis C among injecting drug users participating in the Tacoma Syringe-Exchange Program. Am J Public Health. 1995;85(11):1531–1537. · DOI
  6. Hagan H, McGough JP, Thiede H, Weiss NS, Hopkins S, Alexander ER. Syringe exchange and risk of infection with hepatitis B and C viruses. Am J Epidemiol. 1999;149(3):203–213. · DOI
  7. Normand J, Vlahov D, Moses L. Preventing HIV Transmission: The Role of Sterile Needles and Bleach. Washington, DC: National Academy; 1995.
  8. Gibson DR, Flynn NM, Perales D. Effectiveness of syringe exchange programs in reducing HIV risk behavior and HIV seroconversion among injecting drug users. AIDS. 2001;15(11):1329–1341. · DOI
  9. Ksobiech K. A meta-analysis of needle sharing, lending, and borrowing behaviors of needle exchange program attenders. AIDS Educ Prev. 2003;15(3):257–268. · DOI
  10. Huo D, Ouellet LJ. Needle exchange and injection-related risk behaviors in Chicago: a longitudinal study. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2007;45(1):108–114. · DOI
  11. Burris S, Vernick JS, Ditzler A, Strathdee S. The legality of selling or giving syringes to injection drug users. J Am Pharm Assoc (Wash). 2002;42(6 Suppl 2):S13–S18. · DOI
  12. Bluthenthal RN, Malik MR, Grau LE, Singer M, Marshall P, Heimer R. Sterile syringe access conditions and variations in HIV risk among drug injectors in three cities. Addiction. 2004;99(9):1136–1146. · DOI
  13. Taussig JA, Weinstein B, Burris S, Jones TS. Syringe laws and pharmacy regulations are structural constraints on HIV prevention in the US. AIDS. 2000;14(Suppl 1):S47–S51. · DOI
  14. Rockwell R, Des Jarlais DC, Friedman SR, Perlis TE, Paone D. Geographic proximity, policy and utilization of syringe exchange programmes. AIDS Care. 1999;11(4):437–442. · DOI
  15. Bluthenthal RN, Kral AH, Lorvick J, Watters JK. Impact of law enforcement on syringe exchange programs: a look at Oakland and San Francisco. Med Anthropol. 1997;18(1):61–83. · DOI
  16. Davis CS, Burris S, Kraut-Becher J, Lynch KG, Metzger D. Effects of an intensive street-level police intervention on syringe exchange program use in Philadelphia, PA. Am J Public Health. 2005;95(2):233–236. · DOI
  17. Center for Urban Epidemiologic Studies, New York Academy of Medicine, Beth Israel Medical Center, and National Development and Research Institutes. New York State Expanded Syringe Access Demonstration Program Evaluation. New York: New York Academy of Medicine; 2003.
  18. Fuller CM, Ahern J, Vadnai L, et al. Impact of increased syringe access: preliminary findings on injection drug user syringe source, disposal, and pharmacy sales in Harlem, New York. J Am Pharm Assoc (Wash). 2002;42(6 Suppl 2):S77–S82. · DOI
  19. Rhodes T, Stimson GV, Crofts N, Ball A, Dehne K, Khodakevich L. Drug injecting, rapid HIV spread, and the ‘risk environment’: implications for assessment and response. AIDS. 1999;13(Suppl A):259–269.
  20. Des Jarlais DC. Structural interventions to reduce HIV transmission among injecting drug users. AIDS. 2000;14(Suppl 1):S41–S46. · DOI
  21. Bruneau J, Lamothe F, Franco E, et al. High rates of HIV infection among injection drug users participating in needle exchange programs in Montreal: results of a cohort study. Am J Epidemiol. 1997;146(12):994–1002. · DOI
  22. Strathdee SA, Patrick DM, Currie SL, et al. Needle exchange is not enough: lessons from the Vancouver injecting drug use study. AIDS. 1997;11(8):F59–F65. · DOI
  23. Schechter MT, Strathdee SA, Cornelisse PG, et al. Do needle exchange programmes increase the spread of HIV among injection drug users?: an investigation of the Vancouver outbreak. AIDS. 1999;13(6):F45–F51. · DOI
  24. Wood E, Lloyd-Smith E, Li K, et al. Frequent needle exchange use and HIV incidence in Vancouver, Canada. Am J Med. 2007;120(2):172–179. · DOI
  25. Archibald CP, Ofner M, Strathdee SA, et al. Factors associated with frequent needle exchange program attendance in injection drug users in Vancouver, Canada. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum Retrovirol. 1998;17(2):160–166. · DOI
  26. Hagan H, McGough JP, Thiede H, Hopkins SG, Weiss NS, Alexander ER. Volunteer bias in nonrandomized evaluations of the efficacy of needle-exchange programs. J Urban Health. 2000;77(1):103–112. · DOI
  27. Fisher DG, Reynolds GL, Harbke CR. Selection effect of needle exchange in Anchorage, Alaska. J Urban Health. 2002;79(1):128–135. · DOI
  28. Valente TW, Foreman RK, Junge B, Vlahov D. Satellite exchange in the Baltimore Needle Exchange Program. Public Health Rep. 1998;113(Suppl 1):90–96.
  29. National Institutes of Health. Interventions to prevent HIV risk behaviors. NIH Consensus Statement. Feb 11–13. 1997;15(2):1–41.
  30. Shalala D. Needle Exchange Programs in America: Review of Published Studies and Ongoing Research. Report to the Committee on Appropriations for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies. February 18, 1997.
  31. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Incorporating HIV prevention into the medical care of persons living with HIV: recommendations of CDC, the Health Resources and Services Administration, the National Institutes of Health, and the HIV Medicine Association of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2003;52(RR-12):1–24.
  32. Sifaneck SJ, Neaigus A. The ethnographic accessing, sampling and screening of hidden populations: heroin sniffers in New York City. Addict Res Theory. 2001;9(6):519–543. · DOI
  33. Watters J, Biernacki P. Targeted sampling: options for the study of hidden populations. Soc Probl. 1989;6(4):416–430. · DOI
  34. Heckathorn DD. Respondent-driven sampling: a new approach to the study of hidden populations. Soc Probl. 1997;44(2):174–199. · DOI
  35. Friedman SR, Chapman TF, Perlis TE, et al. Similarities and differences by race/ethnicity in changes of HIV seroprevalence and related behaviors among drug injectors in New York City, 1991–1996. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 1999;22:83–91. · DOI
  36. Friedman SR, Des Jarlais DC, Neaigus A, et al. AIDS and the new drug injector. Nature. 1989;339(6223):333–334. · DOI
  37. Holmberg SD. The estimated prevalence and incidence of HIV in 96 large US metropolitan areas. Am J Public Health. 1996;86(5):642–654. · DOI
  38. Latkin CA, Forman VL. Patterns of needle acquisition and sociobehavioral correlates of needle exchange program attendance in Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2001;27(4):398–404. · DOI
  39. Latkin CA, Hua W, Davey MA. Exploring the role of needle selling in a drug-using community in Baltimore, Maryland. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2005;38(1):57–60. · DOI
  40. Bluthenthal RN, Anderson R, Flynn NM, Kral AH. Higher syringe coverage is associated with lower odds of HIV risk and does not increase unsafe syringe disposal among syringe exchange program clients. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2007;89(2–3):214–222. · DOI
  41. Hagan H, Thiede H, Weiss NS, Hopkins SG, Duchin JS, Alexander ER. Sharing of drug preparation equipment as a risk factor for hepatitis C. Am J Public Health. 2001;91(1):42–46. · DOI
  42. Neaigus A, Gyarmathy VA, Miller M, et al. Injecting and sexual risk correlates of HBV and HCV seroprevalence among new drug injectors. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2007;89(2–3):234–243. · DOI
  43. Neaigus A, Gyarmathy VA, Zhao M, Miller M, Friedman SR, Des Jarlais DC. Sexual and other noninjection risks for HBV and HCV seroconversions among noninjecting heroin users. J Infect Dis. 2007;195(7):1052–1061. · DOI
  44. Morgenstern H. Ecologic studies. In: Rothman KJ, Greenland S, eds. Modern Epidemiology. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 1998:459–480.
  45. Wodak A, Cooney A. Do needle syringe programs reduce HIV infection among injecting drug users: a comprehensive review of the international evidence. Subst Use Misuse. 2006;41(6–7):777–813. · DOI
  46. Watters JK, Estilo MJ, Clark GL, Lorvick J. Syringe and needle exchange as HIV/AIDS prevention for injection drug users. JAMA. 1994;271(2):115–120. · DOI
  47. Vlahov D, Junge B. The role of needle exchange programs in HIV prevention. Public Health Rep. 1998;113(Suppl 1):75–80.
  48. van Ameijden EJC, Coutinho RA. Large decline in injecting drug use in Amsterdam, 1986–1998: explanatory mechanisms and determinants of injecting transitions. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2001;55:356–363. · DOI
  49. Neaigus A, Gyarmathy VA, Miller M, Frajzyngier VM, Friedman SR, Des Jarlais DC. Transitions to injecting drug use among non-injecting heroin users: social network influence and individual susceptibility. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2006;41(4):493–503. · DOI
  50. Hurley SF, Jolley DJ, Kaldor JM. Effectiveness of needle-exchange programmes for prevention of HIV infection. Lancet. 1997;349(9068):1797–1800. · DOI
  51. New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. New York City HIV/AIDS Annual Surveillance Statistics 2005. New York, NY: Department of Health and Mental Hygiene; 2006.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Neaigus, A., Zhao, M., Gyarmathy, V. A., Cisek, L., Friedman, S. R., & Baxter, R. C.
Affiliations
  • National Development and Research Institutes (US)
  • North Jersey Community Research Initiative (US)
Corresponding author
Neaigus, Alan
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Urban Health
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2008-03-14
Volume
85
Issue
3
Pages
309-322
ISSN
  • 0028-7091 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-3460
  • 1468-2869
DOI
10.1007/s11524-008-9271-1
PMC
PMC2329750
OpenAlex
W2072467442
Cited by
57
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 6
FWCI
3.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of Urban Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01da014515-04)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01 DA014515)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › HIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › HIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Keywords
intravenous drug use, needle exchange programs, syringe access, HIV infection, hepatitis B, hepatitis C, blood-borne transmission, needle sharing, structural interventions, Newark, New Jersey, New York City
MeSH terms
Adult, Ethnicity, Hepatitis B, Hepatitis C, Humans, Male, New Jersey, New York City, Pharmacies, Risk Factors, Socioeconomic Factors, Syringes, HIV Infections, Substance Abuse, Intravenous, Needle Sharing, Needle-Exchange Programs

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review