Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38523802›Full record

ArticleDrug and alcohol dependence reports2024

Evaluation of peer recovery services for substance use disorder in Minnesota: Impact of peer recovery initiation on SUD treatment and recovery.

Cody R Tuttle, Aaron T Berger, Sean L Barton, Ben Nguyen, Weston Merrick

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Drug and alcohol dependence reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
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.

Cody R TuttleMinnesota Management and Budget, Impact Evaluation Unit, United States.
Aaron T BergerMinnesota Management and Budget, Impact Evaluation Unit, United States.
Sean L BartonMinnesota Management and Budget, Impact Evaluation Unit, United States.
Ben NguyenMinnesota Management and Budget, Impact Evaluation Unit, United States.
Weston MerrickMinnesota Management and Budget, Impact Evaluation Unit, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Substance use disorder (SUD) remains one of the most persistent public health challenges across the nation and in Minnesota. One intervention to help people with SUD is peer recovery services (PRS). PRS is a form on non-clinical support where trained individuals who are more established in recovery come alongside people currently in the recovery journey and provide guidance in the treatment process, help in accessing resources, and offer an empathetic ear. In combination with other services in the continuum of care, PRS seeks to reduce harm from disordered use. In 2018, Minnesota made PRS for SUD a Medicaid reimbursable service. While prior literature demonstrates promising effects of PRS for SUD, especially in treatment retention and participant experience, most studies evaluated PRS in limited settings, rather than in a large-scale implementation. Our retrospective, matched-cohort study used administrative data to estimate the impact of initiating Medicaid-reimbursable PRS for SUD on treatment, overdose, and mortality. Our results align, in some dimensions, with prior literature evaluating smaller-scale programs with positive impacts on treatment completion. We also find, however, that PRS at scale did not produce other positive outcomes that past studies have documented, particularly around overdose and inpatient treatment. This suggests that PRS follows a common challenge of implementing promising ideas at scale.

Indexed as

Peer recovery servicesRecoverySubstance use disorder

Identifiers

PMID38523802
PMCPMC10958218

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.