|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy. TABLE 7.3 GAO Review: Needle Exchange Program Outcomes Measured and Reported
with high level of statistical power that showed no difference were excluded. UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA REPORTIn September 1993, a second government report, The Public Health Impact of Needle Exchange Programs in the United States and Abroad , was published by the University of California for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). This report consists of a summary volume with two supporting volumes and addresses a number of the questions that this panel was asked to address. ProcedureThe University of California report was the work of a team of 12 individuals with expertise in clinical medicine, nursing, psychology, anthropology, sociology, cost-benefit modeling, and epidemiology. None of the team
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
