Is living close to a drug treatment centre associated with stigma?

IF 4.4 2区 医学 Q1 SUBSTANCE ABUSE International Journal of Drug Policy Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-21 DOI:10.1016/j.drugpo.2025.104707
Xavier Bartoll-Roca , Maria Gabriela Barbaglia , Elisa Puigdomènech , Catrina Clotas , Montse Bartroli , Katherine Pérez
{"title":"Is living close to a drug treatment centre associated with stigma?","authors":"Xavier Bartoll-Roca ,&nbsp;Maria Gabriela Barbaglia ,&nbsp;Elisa Puigdomènech ,&nbsp;Catrina Clotas ,&nbsp;Montse Bartroli ,&nbsp;Katherine Pérez","doi":"10.1016/j.drugpo.2025.104707","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Multiple studies have documented stigma towards people who use drugs, but a less well studied aspect of stigmatisation is the phenomenon known as “not in my backyard,” The aim of this study was to analyse the relationship between living near a drug treatment centre and the degree of perceived public stigma, as well as to identify differences among sociodemographic profiles.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Based on the Barcelona Health Survey (N=3270), public stigma was defined as scores at or above the 66th percentile of an index of 2 questions on the general population's perceptions of people who use drugs as failures and as dangerous (Cronbach‘s alpha = 0.84). Survey participants were categorised into 3 areas based on their proximity to a drug treatment centre: in a buffer within 150 metres, between 150 and 300-metres, and the rest of the city. Logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between perceived public stigma and spatial proximity to a drug treatment centre, as well as variations among sociodemographic profiles.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Living within 150 metres of a drug treatment centre increased the probability of perceived public stigma (odds ratio=1.85 95%CI 1.12–3.07). At the city level, higher public stigma was associated with the older population, those with a lower educational level, and those born in a low-income country. However, the increase in public stigma within the 150-metre buffer was driven by groups that showed low levels of stigma at the city level.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Public stigma in the city is high and increases with proximity to a drug treatment centre, especially among groups that exhibit low levels of stigma at the city level. Identifying social groups showing high levels of “not in my back yard”-related stigma may help to redesign harm reduction interventions focusing on specific groups.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48364,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Drug Policy","volume":"136 ","pages":"Article 104707"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Drug Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0955395925000064","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Multiple studies have documented stigma towards people who use drugs, but a less well studied aspect of stigmatisation is the phenomenon known as “not in my backyard,” The aim of this study was to analyse the relationship between living near a drug treatment centre and the degree of perceived public stigma, as well as to identify differences among sociodemographic profiles.

Methods

Based on the Barcelona Health Survey (N=3270), public stigma was defined as scores at or above the 66th percentile of an index of 2 questions on the general population's perceptions of people who use drugs as failures and as dangerous (Cronbach‘s alpha = 0.84). Survey participants were categorised into 3 areas based on their proximity to a drug treatment centre: in a buffer within 150 metres, between 150 and 300-metres, and the rest of the city. Logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between perceived public stigma and spatial proximity to a drug treatment centre, as well as variations among sociodemographic profiles.

Results

Living within 150 metres of a drug treatment centre increased the probability of perceived public stigma (odds ratio=1.85 95%CI 1.12–3.07). At the city level, higher public stigma was associated with the older population, those with a lower educational level, and those born in a low-income country. However, the increase in public stigma within the 150-metre buffer was driven by groups that showed low levels of stigma at the city level.

Conclusion

Public stigma in the city is high and increases with proximity to a drug treatment centre, especially among groups that exhibit low levels of stigma at the city level. Identifying social groups showing high levels of “not in my back yard”-related stigma may help to redesign harm reduction interventions focusing on specific groups.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
住在药物治疗中心附近是否与病耻感有关?
背景:多项研究记录了对吸毒者的耻辱感,但对耻辱感研究较少的一个方面是被称为“不在我家后院”的现象。本研究的目的是分析居住在药物治疗中心附近与感知到的公共耻辱感程度之间的关系,以及确定社会人口统计学特征之间的差异。方法:基于巴塞罗那健康调查(N=3270),公众污名被定义为在一般人群认为吸毒者是失败的和危险的2个问题的指数中得分等于或高于第66百分位数(Cronbach's alpha = 0.84)。调查参与者根据离戒毒中心的远近被分为3个区域:150米以内的缓冲区,150米至300米之间的缓冲区,以及城市的其他地区。使用逻辑回归模型来评估感知到的公众耻辱与药物治疗中心的空间接近程度之间的关系,以及社会人口统计资料之间的差异。结果:居住在药物治疗中心150米范围内的人感知到公共耻辱的可能性增加(优势比=1.85 95%CI 1.12-3.07)。在城市层面,较高的公众耻辱感与年龄较大的人口、教育水平较低的人口以及出生在低收入国家的人口有关。然而,在150米缓冲区内,公众耻辱感的增加是由在城市层面表现出低耻辱感的群体推动的。结论:该市公众的耻辱感很高,并且随着离药物治疗中心越来越近而增加,特别是在城市层面表现出低耻辱感的群体中。确定表现出高度“不在我的后院”相关耻辱的社会群体可能有助于重新设计针对特定群体的减少伤害干预措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
11.40%
发文量
307
审稿时长
62 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Drug Policy provides a forum for the dissemination of current research, reviews, debate, and critical analysis on drug use and drug policy in a global context. It seeks to publish material on the social, political, legal, and health contexts of psychoactive substance use, both licit and illicit. The journal is particularly concerned to explore the effects of drug policy and practice on drug-using behaviour and its health and social consequences. It is the policy of the journal to represent a wide range of material on drug-related matters from around the world.
期刊最新文献
Everyday discrimination in individuals seeking treatment/receiving support for substance use and caregivers Drinking motives, socioeconomic factors and the harm-reduction potential of NoLo alcohol products for mid-life women How have liberalized drug policies impacted international policing practices across urban and rural jurisdictions? A scoping review From social transmission to platform-accelerated diffusion: Rethinking how psychedelic use spreads ‘It’s Pure Bliss’: Pharmaceutical pleasures in later-life use of sleeping medication
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1