Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24650496›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of law and psychiatry

Engagement processes in model programs for community reentry from prison for people with serious mental illness.

Beth Angell, Elizabeth Matthews, Stacey Barrenger, Amy C Watson, Jeffrey Draine

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of law and psychiatry. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Societal Reentry of Prison Inmates With Mental Illness: Obstacles, Programs, and Best Practices.Journal of correctional health care : the official journal of the National Commission on Correctional Health Care · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Beth AngellSchool of Social Work, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA. Electronic address: angell@ssw.rutgers.edu.
Elizabeth MatthewsSchool of Social Work, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA.
Stacey BarrengerSilver School of Social Work, Ehrenkranz Center, 1 Washington Square North,New York, NY ,10003, USA.
Amy C WatsonJane Addams College of Social Work, University of Illinois-Chicago, 1040 West Harrison Street, Chicago, IL 60607-7134, USA.
Jeffrey DraineSchool of Social Work, Temple University, 1301 Cecil B. Moore Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19122-6091, USA.

Funding

RESEARCH METHODS COREP30MH079920 · NIMH · RUTGERS, THE STATE UNIV OF N.J. · PI WOLFF, NANCY · 2008 to 2012
$7.7M
ADHERENCE AND EMPOWERMENT: Service Participation and Meaningful OutcomesP20MH085981 · NIMH · ILLINOIS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI CORRIGAN, PATRICK W · 2009 to 2013
$4.9M
Critical Time Intervention (CTI) for Men with Mental Illness Leaving PrisonR01MH076068 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI GELLES, RICHARD J. · 2006 to 2010
$3.0M
Mental Illness and Prison Reentry Intervention in a High Risk ContextF31MH093977 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI BARRENGER, STACEY LYNN · 2011 to 2013
$59k
NIMH NIH HHS F31 MH093977NIMH NIH HHS P20 MH085981NIMH NIH HHS P20MH085981NIMH NIH HHS P30 MH079920NIMH NIH HHS P30MH079920NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH076068NIMH NIH HHS R01MH076068
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Linking prisoners with mental illness with treatment following release is critical to preventing recidivism, but little research exists to inform efforts to engage them effectively. This presentation compares the engagement process in two model programs, each representing an evidence-based practice for mental health which has been adapted to the context of prison reentry. One model, Forensic Assertive Community Treatment (FACT), emphasizes a long-term wrap-around approach that seeks to maximize continuity of care by concentrating all services within one interdisciplinary team; the other, Critical Time Intervention (CTI), is a time-limited intervention that promotes linkages to outside services and bolsters natural support systems. To compare engagement practices, we analyze data from two qualitative studies, each conducted in a newly developed treatment program serving prisoners with mental illness being discharged from prisons to urban communities. Findings show that the working relationship in reentry services exhibits unique features and is furthered in both programs by the use of practitioner strategies of engagement, including tangible assistance, methods of interacting with consumers, and encouragement of service use via third parties such as families and parole officers. Nevertheless, each program exhibited distinct cultures and rituals of reentry that were associated with fundamental differences in philosophy and differences in resources available to each program.

Indexed as

Persons with Psychiatric DisordersAdultCase ManagementEvidence-Based PracticeFemaleForensic PsychiatryHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMental DisordersModels, TheoreticalPrisonersProgram DevelopmentQualitative ResearchSocial AdjustmentCritical Time InterventionEngagement modelsForensic Assertive Community TreatmentPrisonersReentry

Identifiers

PMID24650496
PMCPMC4209157

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.