Interventions for female drug-using offenders

“…Our findings that these women overestimate both substance use and incarceration by other US women, and perceive less substance use among their friends compared to other US women while also using substances much more than the general population of women, suggest treatment approaches that involve correcting these estimates and would be feasible to deliver to this population. Effective interventions for women offenders who use drugs are greatly needed, as shown by a recent systematic review that found limited evidence of benefits for treatments tested in this population for reducing drug use or criminal activity (Perry et al, 2019). Given that substance use postincarceration can carry severe consequences (Chamberlain et al, 2019), the present findings may help to guide the development of treatments to deliver during incarceration to reduce substance use.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceived Substance Use Norms Among Jailed Women with Alcohol Use Disorders

Timko

Schonbrun

Anderson

et al. 2020

Alcoholism Clin & Exp Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Social norms regarding substance use predict substance use behaviors. In a sample of jailed women with alcohol use disorders (AUDs), we compared (i) jailed women’s perceptions of the US women population’s rates of substance use, with US women’s actual rates of substance use; (ii) jailed women’s perceived rates of substance use by US women, with their perceptions of use by their own friends; and (iii) US women’s actual rates of substance use, with observed sample substance use rates. Methods Participants were 205 jailed women who met criteria for an AUD. We used the 1‐sample or dependent‐samples t‐test to make the comparisons. Results Participants overestimated US women’s rates of substance use and incarceration rates. They perceived their friends’ substance use as less common than US women’s. The jailed women reported higher rates of their own substance use than actual rates by US women. In addition, jailed women self‐reported less cannabis use, but more alcohol and cocaine use and cigarette smoking, than they perceived their friends to have used. The more women perceived their friends as drinking, the less they had a goal to drink less or abstain from drinking postincarceration; in contrast, perceptions of US women’s drinking were not related to personal goals for drinking. Conclusions Interventions that correct misperceptions about substance use norms may have utility for jailed women with AUDs.

show abstract

“…The scale is based on six cost-effective measures proposed by the World Bank that include dimensions such as: price (30 points), smoke-free laws (22 points), public spending on tobacco control (15 points), including mass communication campaigns, tobacco control projects, educational programs, and support for non-governmental organizations; tobacco advertising, sponsorship and promotion (TAPS) bans (13 points), health warnings (10 points) and treatment (10 points). The score given to each policy dimension is weighted by its reported effectiveness according to scientific evidence on tobacco control 19 . This score increases with the strength of tobacco control policies up to a possible maximum score of 100 points, indicating the highest level of implementation of all tobacco control measures considered, as each policy domain is rated individually 14 .…”

Section: Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The association between tobacco control policy implementation and country-level socioeconomic factors in 31 European countries

Feliu

Filippidis

Joossens³

et al. 2021

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

European countries have made significant progress in implementing tobacco control policies to reduce tobacco use; however, whether socioeconomic status (SES) of a country may influence the implementation of such policies is unknown. The aim of this study is to assess the association between country-level SES and the implementation level of tobacco control policies in 31 European countries. An ecological study using data from Eurostat, Human Development Reports on several SES indicators and the Tobacco Control Scale (TCS) of 2016 was conducted to measure country-level tobacco control policies. We analysed the relationship between SES indicators and the TCS by means of scatter-plots and Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients (rsp) and multivariable linear regression analysis. In Europe, no statistically significant association was found between SES factors and the level of implementation of tobacco control policies. Only public spending on tobacco control was associated with all SES factors, except for Gini Index (an income inequality index). The strongest associations of TCS scores for this policy domain were found with the Human Development Index (rsp = 0.586; p < 0.001) and the Gross Domestic Product per capita (in Euros) (rsp = 0.562; p = 0.001). The adjusted linear regression model showed an association of tobacco control policy implementation with countries’ geographical location (Western Europe, β = − 15.7; p = 0.009, compared to Northern Europe). In conclusion, no association was found between SES factors and the level of implementation of tobacco control policies in 31 European countries; policymakers should be aware that tobacco control policies could be successfully implemented despite socioeconomic constraints, especially when these policies are of low cost and cost-effective (i.e., smoke-free bans and taxation).

show abstract

Interventions for female drug-using offenders

Cited by 10 publications

References 275 publications

Effectiveness of psychological interventions in prison to reduce recidivism: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Effectiveness of psychological interventions in prison to reduce recidivism: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Perceived Substance Use Norms Among Jailed Women with Alcohol Use Disorders

The association between tobacco control policy implementation and country-level socioeconomic factors in 31 European countries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About