Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38578372›Full record

ArticleHealth & justice2024

Who gets screened and who tests positive? Drug screening among justice-involved youth in a midwestern urban county.

Richelle L Clifton, Ian Carson, Allyson L Dir, Wanzhu Tu, Tamika C B Zapolski, Matthew C Aalsma

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health & justice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

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

6 authors.

Richelle L CliftonDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA.
Ian CarsonDepartment of Psychology, Indiana University Indianapolis, 402 N. Blackford St., LD 124, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA. icarson@iu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9872-5848
Allyson L DirDepartment of Psychiatry, Adolescent Behavioral Health Research Program, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Wanzhu TuDepartment of Biostatistics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Tamika C B ZapolskiDepartment of Psychology, Indiana University Indianapolis, 402 N. Blackford St., LD 124, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA.
Matthew C AalsmaDepartment of Pediatrics, Section of Adolescent Medicine, Adolescent Behavioral Health Research Program, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.

Funding

Alliance to Disseminate Addiction Prevention and Treatment (ADAPT): A Statewide Learning Health System to Reduce Substance Use among Justice-Involved Youth in Rural Communities.UG1DA050070 · NIDA · INDIANA UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS · PI AALSMA, MATTHEW · 2019 to 2023
$5.7M
Improving adolescent health outcomes through preventive care transformationR01HS022681 · AHRQ · INDIANA UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS · PI AALSMA, MATTHEW · 2013 to 2013
$1.5M
AHRQ HHS R01 HS022681NIDA NIH HHS UG1 DA050070NIDA NIH HHS UG1DA050070
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGiven high rates of substance use among justice-involved youth, justice systems have attempted to monitor use through drug screening (DS) procedures. However, there is discretion in deciding who is screened for substance use, as not every youth who encounters the system is screened. The aim of the current study was to examine factors associated with selection for and results of oral DS among justice-involved youth assigned to probation to better inform potential DS policy. Electronic court records from 4,668 youth with first-incident records assigned to probation in a midwestern urban county's juvenile justice system between 2011 and 2016 were included in the analytical sample. Race/ethnicity, gender, age, number of charges and charge type for the current incident were included as independent variables.

resultsMultivariable hierarchical logistic regression analyses indicated that males were more likely to be assigned to DS (aOR = 0.40, 95%CI [0.34, 0.46]), and more likely to test positive for use (aOR = 0.43, 95% CI [0.34, 0.54]) than females. As age increased, youth were less likely to be assigned to DS (aOR = 0.91, 95% CI [0.87, 0.94]), with non-significant differences in DS results. Greater number of charges were associated with a higher likelihood of being assigned to DS (aOR = 1.55, 95% CI [1.43, 1.68]). Youth with violent offenses were more likely to be assigned to DS than those with other offense types (property offenses, drug offenses, statutory offenses, disorderly conduct, and all other offenses), but less likely to test positive for use.

conclusionsMany factors were associated with differences in DS, but these factors were not always associated with differential DS results. Demographic or charge-based decisions may not be appropriate for DS assignment.

Indexed as

Drug screeningJuvenile justiceJuvenile probation

Identifiers

PMID38578372
PMCPMC10997690

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.