Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
In formulating policies for drug offenders, lawmakers must decide concrete questions about such matters as legal jurisdiction, burdens of proof, and reporting of progress information. Although these decisions may seem incidental to treatment and beyond the purview of science, they are based on empirically testable assumptions about the behavior of drug abusers and have a direct bearing on the efficacy of drug treatment interventions. Unfortunately, these assumptions have generally not been subjected to empirical inquiry. As a result, drug policy continues to be crafted by non-scientific advocates and subjected to popular vote by an insufficiently informed public. This article identifies several empirically answerable questions that underlie critical decision points in criminal statutes for drug offenders, reviews the available research evidence relevant to these questions, and encourages drug abuse researchers to conduct studies aimed squarely at informing these policy-relevant decisions.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0740-5472(03)00122-3 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!