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
Based on documentary analyses and interviews with twenty key informants in 2012, this paper analyses the shift in British drugs policy towards "recovery" from the perspectives of major stakeholders. The processes involved in reopening the debate surrounding the role of substitution treatment and its re-emergence on to the policy agenda are examined. Drawing on Kingdon's work on agenda-setting, the ways in which methadone maintenance was challenged and defended by key stakeholders in the initial phase of policy development and the negotiation of a "recovery" focus as the organizing concept for British drugs policy are explored. Study limitations are noted.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/10826084.2013.797727 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!