ArticleHarm reduction journal2025
Characteristics of take-home fentanyl test strip use and support for drug checking services among people who use heroin in Australia: learnings for an increasingly complex drug market.
Article in Harm reduction journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Interpol review of forensic drug chemistry, 2022-2025.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis paper examines: (i) the acceptability of, and behavioural outcomes associated with, take-home fentanyl test strips (FTS), and (ii) support for, and preferences regarding, drug checking services among people who use heroin.
methodsData were obtained from 78 people who had used heroin in the past 6 months, recruited from treatment and harm reduction services in Sydney, Australia in 2020-21. Participants were provided with 10 BTNX Rapid Response™ single-use immunoassay FTS and surveyed 4 weeks later.
resultsAmong those who completed the follow-up survey (n = 72), 81% (n = 58) had used at least one FTS by the time of follow-up (median 6 strips). Participants reported high confidence in their ability to use FTS at both baseline (immediately post training) and follow-up. Of those who self-reported a positive FTS result (n = 25), 48% (n = 12) reported using less than they otherwise would have or starting with a smaller amount, and 60% (n = 15) shared this information with peers and/or health professionals. Of those who used FTS and responded, 95% (n = 54/57) reported that they would continue using FTS if they were free to access, and 97% (n = 56/58) would recommend them to their peers. Among those who completed the follow-up survey, the majority (93%; n = 67) reported that they would like to be able to access a drug checking service, preferably via a supervised injecting facility or Needle and Syringe Program.
conclusionsAcceptability of FTS and support for drug checking were high among our sample. Multi-instrument approaches to drug checking may form one component of an effective response to the emerging threat of illicitly manufactured synthetic opioids.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.