ArticleJournal of addiction medicine
Collaborating With Jails to Provide Community-based Medication for Opioid Use Disorder: Qualitative Perspectives From MOUD Treatment Providers.
Article in Journal of addiction medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perspectives on collaboration between drug courts and MOUD providers: Impact of interagency implementation strategies.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2026Article
- Reducing confounding in natural experiments: evaluating a multilevel matching approach.Journal of experimental criminology · 2025Article
- Mind the gap: a quality improvement study to determine health care value of rapid-access telemedicine addiction treatment in recently incarcerated individuals.BMC health services research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesAs carceral settings increasingly offer medications for opioid use disorders (MOUD), community-based providers will need to navigate relationships with correctional agencies to ensure continuity of MOUD upon release. Although collaboration has been identified as critical between agencies, limited research is available that details how providers can work with jails. We describe the perspectives of MOUD providers about their experiences collaborating with jails that had recently begun to offer MOUD.
methodsWe conducted hour-long interviews with 36 MOUD providers from 18 community-based agencies. Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) concepts informed data collection and analysis.
resultsMOUD providers described agency-specific (inner context) factors that facilitated collaboration, including staffing (employing staff with knowledge of co-occurring conditions) and agency culture (adaptability to change, recognition of gaps in services, being judgment-free). Providers also reported external factors as facilitators, such as broad community support of MOUD services and provision of training about MOUD to jail staff. Holding regular meetings, with a dedicated contact person, helped to overcome communication problems. However, the fragmentation of in-jail treatment services, exacerbated by jails' contracting with different healthcare providers, made it difficult to coordinate re-entry and establish agency relationships. Actively and intentionally building interagency partnerships and collaborating across interagency cultural and structural differences were bridging factors that developed and sustained collaborations.
conclusionsOur findings offer promising suggestions for establishing collaborations with carceral partners, including assessing internal agency conditions, seeking external community supports, committing to actively engaging and sustaining collaborations, and using interagency differences to develop mutually beneficial relationships.
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.