Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28610574›Full record

ArticleImplementation science : IS2017

Predicting evidence-based treatment sustainment: results from a longitudinal study of the Adolescent-Community Reinforcement Approach.

Sarah B Hunter, Bing Han, Mary E Slaughter, Susan H Godley, Bryan R Garner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science : IS, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Sarah B HunterRAND, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90407-2138, USA. shunter@rand.org.
Bing HanRAND, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90407-2138, USA.
Mary E SlaughterRAND, 4570 Fifth Ave., Suite 600, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA.
Susan H GodleyChestnut Health Systems, 448 Wylie Dr, Normal, IL, 61761, USA.
Bryan R GarnerResearch Triangle Institute, 3040 E. Cornwallis Rd, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709-2194, USA.

Funding

Effectiveness of Technology Assisted Diffusion For Evidence Based TreatmentR01AA021217 · NIAAA · RAND CORPORATION · PI HUNTER, SARAH · 2013 to 2015
$1.5M
NIAAA NIH HHS R01 AA021217
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImplementation support models are increasingly being used to enhance the delivery of evidence-based treatments (EBTs) in routine care settings. Little is known about the extent to which these models lead to continued EBT use after implementation support ends. Moreover, few empirical studies longitudinally examine the hypothesized factors associated with long-term psychosocial EBT use (i.e., sustainment). In an effort to address this gap, the current study examined sustainment of an EBT called the Adolescent-Community Reinforcement Approach (A-CRA) following the end of implementation support.

methodsBetween 2006 and 2010, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration awarded 3 years of A-CRA implementation support to 82 community-based organizations around the USA. The extent to which A-CRA was sustained following grant end and the hypothesized factors associated with EBT sustainment were collected using both retrospective and prospective data. We examined the extent to which 10 core treatment elements of A-CRA were sustained and the associations between the extent of A-CRA sustainment and hypothesized factors using a pattern-mixture longitudinal modeling approach.

resultsStaff from 76 organizations participated in data collection for a 92.86% response rate. On average, about half of the 10 core treatment elements were sustained following the loss of implementation support. Factors that appeared most important to A-CRA sustainment included characteristics that were related to the outer setting (communication, funding, and partnerships), inner setting (political support, organizational capacity, and supervisor turnover rate), implementation support period (number of clinicians and supervisors certified and employed at support end and number of youth served), and staff perceptions of the intervention (implementation difficulty, relative advantage, and perceived success).

conclusionsEven with multiple years of implementation support, community-based organizations face challenges in sustaining EBT delivery over time. Consistent with implementation theories, multiple factors appear related with EBT sustainment, including the degree of implementation during the initial support period, as well as adequate funding, infrastructure support, and staff support following the end of funding.

Indexed as

Reinforcement, PsychologyAdolescentCommunity Health ServicesEvidence-Based MedicineHumansLongitudinal StudiesProgram EvaluationSubstance-Related DisordersUnited StatesUnited States Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services AdministrationAdolescentLongitudinal analysisProgram sustainmentSubstance use treatment

Identifiers

PMID28610574
PMCPMC5470280

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.