Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36717527›Full record

ArticleAdministration and policy in mental health2023

Competing Concerns in Efforts to Reduce Criminal Legal Contact Among People with Serious Mental Illnesses: Findings from a Multi-City Study on Misdemeanor Arrests.

Leah G Pope, Aaron Stagoff-Belfort, Amanda Warnock, Jason Tan de Bibiana, Amy C Watson, Jennifer Wood, Michael T Compton

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Administration and policy in mental health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Restructuring Crisis Response Programs as Civilian-Led: A Scoping Review.Administration and policy in mental health · 2026
    Article
  4. 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 5 institutions in 1 country.

Leah G PopeDepartment of Psychiatry, Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, NY, USA. leah.pope@nyspi.columbia.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5491-5551
Aaron Stagoff-BelfortVera Institute of Justice, New York, NY, USA.
Amanda WarnockDepartment of Psychiatry, Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, NY, USA.
Jason Tan de BibianaVera Institute of Justice, New York, NY, USA.
Amy C WatsonHelen Bader School of Social Welfare, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, USA.
Jennifer WoodDepartment of Criminal Justice, College of Liberal Arts, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Michael T ComptonDepartment of Psychiatry, Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, NY, USA.
New York Psychoanalytic Society and Institute · USVera Institute of Justice · USColumbia University · USTemple University · USUniversity of Wisconsin–Milwaukee · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

People with serious mental illnesses are disproportionately involved in the criminal legal system, often for low-level, non-violent misdemeanors. This paper examines how decision-makers at different stages of the criminal legal system articulate unique visions of the "best approach" for addressing this problem of over-representation. Focus groups and in-depth interviews were conducted with 94 stakeholders from Atlanta, Chicago, New York City, and Philadelphia to understand how decision-makers from different agencies use and process specific misdemeanor charges in relation to people with serious mental illnesses. Data were analyzed using a thematic approach. The data reveal a series of tensions regarding how criminal legal system stakeholders process people with serious mental illnesses through the misdemeanor system. Three key themes emerged from analysis. The first characterizes the shared commitment across agencies to reducing system contact among people with mental illnesses. The second explores how agencies differ on how to make good on that commitment because of the distinct values and goals they bring to the table. The final theme explores the limits of current approaches to reducing system contact for people with mental illnesses. Findings are discussed in the context of literature on "loose coupling" and the focal concerns framework and demonstrate that decisions about how and when to intervene with people with mental illnesses in the criminal legal system are influenced by the varying orientations, goals, and values of stakeholder agencies. Understanding these core differences is a critical step toward value alignment in strategies to reduce system involvement among people with mental illnesses.

Indexed as

CriminalsMental DisordersCrimeFocus GroupsHumansLaw EnforcementCriminal Legal SystemFocal ConcernsMental IllnessesMisdemeanors

Identifiers

PMID36717527
PMCPMC9886548
OpenAlexW4318592087

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.