Historique
Rapport
Methodological guidelines to estimate the prevalence of problem drug use on the local level. EMCDDA project CT.97.EP.05
Auteur(s) :
HAY, G. ;
McKEGANEY, N. ;
WIESSING, L. ;
HARTNOLL, R. ;
BELLO, P. Y. ;
D'IPPOLITI, D. ;
DOMINGO-SALVANY, A. ;
FRISCHER, M. ;
KRAUS, L. ;
SMIT, F.
Année
1999
Page(s) :
76 p.
Langue(s) :
Anglais
Éditeur(s) :
Lisbon : OEDT / EMCDDA
;
University of Glasgow, CT.97.EP.05
Domaine :
Drogues illicites / Illicit drugs
Discipline :
EPI (Epidémiologie / Epidemiology)
Thésaurus mots-clés
RECOMMANDATION
;
METHODE
;
PREVALENCE
;
CAPTURE-RECAPTURE
;
MODELE STATISTIQUE
;
EPIDEMIOLOGIE
Résumé :
'How many people use illicit drugs?' is a question which is deceptively easy to ask but notoriously difficult to answer. To examine the tools which were available to answer this question a scientific seminar was organised by the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) and the Pompidou Group of the Council of Europe. This seminar came to be known as the Strasbourg Seminar and a collection of the presented papers formed the basis of a Scientific Monograph.
Methodological advances have been made since then, including an EMCDDA-funded comparative pilot study in which estimates of the prevalence of opiate use were obtained in seven European Union cities using the capture-recapture method. That study brought together a range of experts from throughout the European Union, and the experienced gained from undertaking prevalence studies in these, and other, locations has now been channeled into producing methodological guidelines.
Methodological advances have been made since then, including an EMCDDA-funded comparative pilot study in which estimates of the prevalence of opiate use were obtained in seven European Union cities using the capture-recapture method. That study brought together a range of experts from throughout the European Union, and the experienced gained from undertaking prevalence studies in these, and other, locations has now been channeled into producing methodological guidelines.
- voir aussi :
Cote :
OEDT-1.4