让宗教领袖有效参与注射器服务计划:美国牧师的知识、看法和问题。

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 SUBSTANCE ABUSE Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy Pub Date : 2024-08-05 DOI:10.1186/s13011-024-00620-y
Betsy Smither, Philip M Reeves, Jennifer Reynolds
{"title":"让宗教领袖有效参与注射器服务计划:美国牧师的知识、看法和问题。","authors":"Betsy Smither, Philip M Reeves, Jennifer Reynolds","doi":"10.1186/s13011-024-00620-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To identify faith-based leaders' (FBLs') knowledge, perceptions, and questions about syringe services programs (SSPs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a one-time, national online survey of 461 Christian FBLs August-September 2022.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>56% of FBLs agreed they support having SSPs in their communities; only 7% strongly disagreed. We identified 15 main questions FBLs have about SSPs. We found statistically significant differences based on FBL Protestant affiliations. Mainline FBLs are more knowledgeable about SSPs, likely to believe a larger number of SSP services would benefit their community, supportive of SSPs, interested in data related to SSPs, and likely to look to local public health officials to shape their opinions on SSPs compared with non-mainline FBLs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>SSP advocates can address questions that FBLs have about SSPs before beginning outreach. By understanding common Protestant denominational affiliations, advocates can focus initial engagement efforts on FBLs in their communities who are more likely to support SSPs. Our findings suggest that local public health officials can influence FBLs' opinions about SSPs.</p>","PeriodicalId":22041,"journal":{"name":"Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11302828/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectively engaging faith-based leaders on syringe services programs: U.S. pastors' knowledge, perceptions, and questions.\",\"authors\":\"Betsy Smither, Philip M Reeves, Jennifer Reynolds\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13011-024-00620-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To identify faith-based leaders' (FBLs') knowledge, perceptions, and questions about syringe services programs (SSPs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a one-time, national online survey of 461 Christian FBLs August-September 2022.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>56% of FBLs agreed they support having SSPs in their communities; only 7% strongly disagreed. We identified 15 main questions FBLs have about SSPs. We found statistically significant differences based on FBL Protestant affiliations. Mainline FBLs are more knowledgeable about SSPs, likely to believe a larger number of SSP services would benefit their community, supportive of SSPs, interested in data related to SSPs, and likely to look to local public health officials to shape their opinions on SSPs compared with non-mainline FBLs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>SSP advocates can address questions that FBLs have about SSPs before beginning outreach. By understanding common Protestant denominational affiliations, advocates can focus initial engagement efforts on FBLs in their communities who are more likely to support SSPs. Our findings suggest that local public health officials can influence FBLs' opinions about SSPs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22041,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11302828/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-024-00620-y\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SUBSTANCE ABUSE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-024-00620-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的确定宗教领袖(FBLs)对注射器服务计划(SSPs)的了解、看法和问题:我们于 2022 年 8 月至 9 月对 461 名基督教信仰领袖进行了一次性全国在线调查:56%的无国界医生同意他们支持在社区开展注射器服务计划;只有7%的人强烈反对。我们确定了自由职业者对 SSP 的 15 个主要问题。我们发现,在统计意义上,不同信仰的新教徒之间存在明显差异。与非主流自由肢体运动者相比,主流自由肢体运动者对 SSP 有更多的了解,可能认为更多的 SSP 服务将使他们的社区受益,支持 SSP,对与 SSP 相关的数据感兴趣,并可能希望当地的公共卫生官员来影响他们对 SSP 的看法:SSP 倡导者可以在开展外联活动之前解决非主流自由职业者对 SSP 的疑问。通过了解常见的新教教派归属,倡导者可以将初步接触工作的重点放在社区中更有可能支持撒哈拉以南非洲撒哈拉以南非洲的无信仰者身上。我们的研究结果表明,地方公共卫生官员可以影响无国界医生组织对 SSP 的看法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Effectively engaging faith-based leaders on syringe services programs: U.S. pastors' knowledge, perceptions, and questions.

Objective: To identify faith-based leaders' (FBLs') knowledge, perceptions, and questions about syringe services programs (SSPs).

Methods: We conducted a one-time, national online survey of 461 Christian FBLs August-September 2022.

Results: 56% of FBLs agreed they support having SSPs in their communities; only 7% strongly disagreed. We identified 15 main questions FBLs have about SSPs. We found statistically significant differences based on FBL Protestant affiliations. Mainline FBLs are more knowledgeable about SSPs, likely to believe a larger number of SSP services would benefit their community, supportive of SSPs, interested in data related to SSPs, and likely to look to local public health officials to shape their opinions on SSPs compared with non-mainline FBLs.

Conclusions: SSP advocates can address questions that FBLs have about SSPs before beginning outreach. By understanding common Protestant denominational affiliations, advocates can focus initial engagement efforts on FBLs in their communities who are more likely to support SSPs. Our findings suggest that local public health officials can influence FBLs' opinions about SSPs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
73
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊介绍: Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that encompasses research concerning substance abuse, with a focus on policy issues. The journal aims to provide an environment for the exchange of ideas, new research, consensus papers, and critical reviews, to bridge the established fields that share a mutual goal of reducing the harms from substance use. These fields include: legislation pertaining to substance use; correctional supervision of people with substance use disorder; medical treatment and screening; mental health services; research; and evaluation of substance use disorder programs.
期刊最新文献
The relationship between insecure attachment and nicotine dependence among users of classic cigarettes, e-cigarettes, and heated tobacco products: a moderated mediation model. Access and barriers to safer supply prescribing during a toxic drug emergency: a mixed methods study of implementation in British Columbia, Canada. Initiation and/or re-initiation of drug use among people who use drugs in Vancouver, Canada from 2021 to 2022: a prospective cohort study. Sex-related inequalities in current cigarette smoking among adolescents in Africa. Assessing support for substance use policies among the general public and policy influencers in two Canadian provinces.
×
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:481959085
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