ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023
A Pilot Study of Training Peer Recovery Specialists in Behavioral Activation in the United States: Preliminary Outcomes and Predictors of Competence.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Strength in Recovery: A Practice-Informed Commentary on Peer Recovery Specialists Facilitating Gambling Recovery Groups.Journal of gambling studies · 2026Article
- Co-Designing the PATH Harm Reduction Training for the Peer Workforce: A Community-Based Participatory Approach.Research square · 2025Article
- Development and Piloting of a Scalable Training for Peer Recovery Specialists in an Evidence-Based Substance Use Intervention: Preliminary Implementation Outcomes.Administration and policy in mental health · 2025Article
- Supporting linkage facilitators working with persons with opioid use disorder: challenges, advances, and future directions.Frontiers in public health · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe peer recovery specialist (PRS) workforce has rapidly expanded to increase access to substance-use disorder services for underserved communities. PRSs are not typically trained in evidence-based interventions (EBIs) outside of motivational interviewing, although evidence demonstrates the feasibility of PRS delivery of certain EBIs, such as a brief behavioral intervention, behavioral activation. However, characteristics that predict PRS competency in delivering EBIs such as behavioral activation remain unknown, and are critical for PRS selection, training, and supervision if the PRS role is expanded. This study aimed to explore the outcomes of a brief PRS training period in behavioral activation and identify predictors of competence.
methodTwenty PRSs in the United States completed a two-hour training on PRS-delivered behavioral activation. Participants completed baseline and post-training assessments, including roleplay and assessments of PRS characteristics, attitudes towards EBIs, and theoretically relevant personality constructs. Roleplays were coded for competence (behavioral activation specific and PRS skills more broadly, i.e., PRS competence) and changes were assessed from baseline to post-training. Linear regression models tested factors predicting post-training competence, controlling for baseline competence.
resultsThere was a significant pre-post increase in behavioral activation competence (
conclusionsThis study provides preliminary evidence that behavioral activation may be appropriate for dissemination to PRSs through brief trainings, particularly for PRSs with more work experience. However, additional research is needed to examine predictors of competence among PRSs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.