Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29695226›Full record

Trial reportPsychiatric services (Washington, D.C.)2018

Impact of Agency Receipt of Incentives and Reminders on Engagement and Continuity of Care for Clients With Co-Occurring Disorders.

Margaret T Lee, Andrea Acevedo, Deborah W Garnick, Constance M Horgan, Lee Panas, Grant A Ritter, Kevin M Campbell

Open access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 36% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Margaret T LeeWith the exception of Dr. Campbell, the authors are with the Institute for Behavioral Health, Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University, Waltham, Massachusetts. Dr. Acevedo is also with the Department of Community Health, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts. Dr. Campbell is with the Division of Behavioral Health and Recovery, Washington State Behavioral Health Administration, Olympia.
Andrea AcevedoWith the exception of Dr. Campbell, the authors are with the Institute for Behavioral Health, Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University, Waltham, Massachusetts. Dr. Acevedo is also with the Department of Community Health, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts. Dr. Campbell is with the Division of Behavioral Health and Recovery, Washington State Behavioral Health Administration, Olympia.
Deborah W GarnickWith the exception of Dr. Campbell, the authors are with the Institute for Behavioral Health, Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University, Waltham, Massachusetts. Dr. Acevedo is also with the Department of Community Health, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts. Dr. Campbell is with the Division of Behavioral Health and Recovery, Washington State Behavioral Health Administration, Olympia.
Constance M HorganWith the exception of Dr. Campbell, the authors are with the Institute for Behavioral Health, Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University, Waltham, Massachusetts. Dr. Acevedo is also with the Department of Community Health, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts. Dr. Campbell is with the Division of Behavioral Health and Recovery, Washington State Behavioral Health Administration, Olympia.
Lee PanasWith the exception of Dr. Campbell, the authors are with the Institute for Behavioral Health, Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University, Waltham, Massachusetts. Dr. Acevedo is also with the Department of Community Health, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts. Dr. Campbell is with the Division of Behavioral Health and Recovery, Washington State Behavioral Health Administration, Olympia.
Grant A RitterWith the exception of Dr. Campbell, the authors are with the Institute for Behavioral Health, Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University, Waltham, Massachusetts. Dr. Acevedo is also with the Department of Community Health, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts. Dr. Campbell is with the Division of Behavioral Health and Recovery, Washington State Behavioral Health Administration, Olympia.
Kevin M CampbellWith the exception of Dr. Campbell, the authors are with the Institute for Behavioral Health, Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University, Waltham, Massachusetts. Dr. Acevedo is also with the Department of Community Health, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts. Dr. Campbell is with the Division of Behavioral Health and Recovery, Washington State Behavioral Health Administration, Olympia.
Behavioral Health Services · US

Funding

Research Support CoreP30DA035772 · NIDA · BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY · PI Haiden A Huskamp, SHARON REIF · 2015 to 2026
$11.3M
Incentives and Alerts for Improving Performance in Washington StateR01DA033468 · NIDA · BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY · PI GARNICK, DEBORAH W. · 2012 to 2016
$2.0M
NIDA NIH HHS P30 DA035772NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA033468
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study examined whether having co-occurring substance use and mental disorders influenced treatment engagement or continuity of care and whether offering financial incentives, client-specific electronic reminders, or a combination to treatment agencies improved treatment engagement and continuity of care among clients with co-occurring disorders.

methodsThe study used a randomized cluster design to assign agencies (N=196) providing publicly funded substance use disorder treatment in Washington State to a research arm: incentives only, reminders only, incentives and reminders, and a control condition. Data were analyzed for 76,044 outpatient, 32,797 residential, and 39,006 detoxification admissions from Washington's treatment data system. Multilevel logistic regressions were conducted, with clients nested within agencies, to examine the effect of the interventions on treatment engagement and continuity of care.

resultsCompared with clients with a substance use disorder only, clients with co-occurring disorders were less likely to engage in outpatient treatment or have continuity of care after discharge from residential treatment, but they were more likely to have continuity of care after discharge from detoxification. The interventions did not influence treatment engagement or continuity of care, except the reminders had a positive impact on continuity of care after residential treatment among clients with co-occurring disorders.

conclusionsIn general, the interventions did not result in improved treatment engagement or continuity of care. The limited number of significant results supporting the influence of incentives and alerts on treatment engagement and continuity of care add to the mixed findings reported by previous research. Multiple interventions may be needed for performance improvement.

Indexed as

MotivationAdolescentAdultBehavior TherapyContinuity of Patient CareFemaleHealth Systems AgenciesHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedPatient DischargeResidential TreatmentSubstance Abuse Treatment CentersSubstance-Related DisordersWashingtoncontinuity of careCo-occurring substance use and mental health disorderselectronic remindersfinancial incentivestreatment engagement

Identifiers

PMID29695226
PMCPMC6193487
OpenAlexW2801951142

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.