No abstract

There is a paucity of research focusing on the prevalence, incidence and impact of diabetes among people with intellectual and developmental disability. Further research is needed to inform policy and practice in this area and, in particular, work is needed to develop methodologies, evaluation tools, educational resources and diabetes care support services appropriate to the needs of people with intellectual and developmental disability.

The data suggest that mandatory interventions based on trading hours restrictions were associated with reduced emergency department injury presentations in high-alcohol hours than voluntary interventions.

Patron banning in Australia embodies a range of exclusionary measures in response to alcoholrelated disorder. Patrons can be banned from licensed venues, entertainment precincts or wider public areas. Banning mechanisms remove and exclude troublesome individuals and are presumed to deter them, and others, from engaging in further problematic behaviour. The use of exclusion reflects key assumptions in relation to alcohol-related disorderly behaviour and effective management of risks to which it may give rise. However, the rationale underpinning much of the banning-related legislative and operational policing developments reflects largely unsubstantiated assertions of need and effect. Despite the steady expansion of banning powers across Australian jurisdictions there is limited oversight of their use. This article examines the expansion of police-imposed banning powers. Their discretionary, on-the-spot and permissible pre-emptive imposition has potential consequences that extend beyond the management of alcohol-related issues. Yet their use and effect has been subject to little scrutiny.

Self-report findings suggest drug use in Australian nightlife is common, although still very much a minority past-time. Drug swabs indicate a higher prevalence of use (20%) than self-report (9%), which suggests that self-reported drug use may not be reliable in this context.

BackgroundAlcohol-related harm is a substantial burden on the community in Australia and internationally, particularly harm related to risky drinking practices of young people in the night-time economy. This protocol paper describes a study that will report on the changes in a wide range of health and justice outcome measures associated with major policy changes in the state of Queensland, Australia. A key element includes trading hours restrictions for licensed premises to 2 am for the state and 3 am in Safe Night Precincts (SNPs). Other measures introduced include drinks restrictions after midnight, increased patron banning measures for repeat offenders, mandatory ID scanning of patrons in late-night venues, and education campaigns.MethodsThe primary aim of the study is to evaluate change in the levels of harm due to these policy changes using administrative data (e.g., police, hospital, ambulance, and court data). Other study elements will investigate the impact of the Policy by measuring foot traffic volume in SNPs, using ID scanner data to quantify the volume of people entering venues and measure the effectiveness of banning notices, using patron interviews to quantify the levels of pre-drinking, intoxication and illicit drug use within night-time economy districts, and to explore the impacts of the Policy on business and live music, and costs to the community.DiscussionThe information gathered through this project aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the Policy and to draw on these findings to inform future prevention and enforcement approaches by policy makers, police, and venue staff.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12889-017-4811-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background: Driving under the influence (DUI) is a major cause of death and disability. Although a broad array of programs designed to curb DUI incidents are currently offered to both firsttime and recidivist DUI offenders, existing evaluations of the effectiveness of these programs have reported mixed results. Objective: To synthesize the results of DUI program evaluations and determine the strength of the available evidence for reducing recidivism for different types of programs. Methods: A systematic review of all EBSCO databases, EMBASE, PubMed, ProQuest, Sociological Abstracts and TRIS was conducted to identify evaluations of treatments/ interventions to prevent DUI offenses. Additional articles were identified from reference lists of relevant articles. Results: A total of 42 relevant studies were identified by the search strategy. Of these, 33 utilized non-experimental evaluation designs or reported insufficient data to allow effect sizes to be calculated, making meta-analysis unfeasible. Evaluations of several different program types reported evidence of some level of effectiveness. Conclusion: Because of the general lack of high quality evidence assessing the effectiveness of DUI prevention programs, it is not possible to make conclusive statements about the types of programs that are likely to be most effective. Nonetheless, there was some evidence to support the effectiveness of programs that utilize intensive supervision and education. There is a need for future evaluations to adopt more scientifically rigorous research designs to establish the effects of these programs.

The findings from the current study may assist in developing preventative techniques for young men which target masculinity concerns and the consequences of participating in MARA.