ArticleThe journal of behavioral health services & research2025
The Impact of Peer-Based Recovery Support Services: Mediating Factors of Client Outcomes.
Article in The journal of behavioral health services & research, 2025. 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Research demonstrates a positive impact of Peer Based Recovery Support Services (PBRSS) facilitated by peer recovery specialists (PRS), who are people in recovery from behavioral health conditions (e.g., substance use disorders [SUD] and mental health conditions). This study investigated PBRSS, their impact on client outcomes (e.g., substance use, health), and the factors (e.g., self-efficacy, perceived relationship with/helpfulness of PRS) mediating the relationship between services and outcomes while controlling for sociodemographic information (e.g., age). Data were collected across 58 sites within 25 agencies providing PBRSS in a state located in Northeastern USA. Cross-lagged panel models were used to examine 12 longitudinal mediational models in a sample of N = 412. Models were examined over two time periods (i.e., T1 and T2). After alpha correction (p = .00417), most results were nonsignificant. However, several findings indicated that constructs were significantly related across time in all models (e.g., self-efficacy at T1 significantly predicted self-efficacy at T2), while many point-in-time associations were also significant (e.g., number of services received was positively related to relationship/helpfulness of PRS at T1 and T2). Better PRS relationship/helpfulness at T1 significantly predicted a lower number of services received at T2, while receiving more services at T1 significantly predicted better PRS relationship/helpfulness at T2. Being older significantly predicted a worse overall health at T2 in some models. While no mediation was found, this study is important as it assists in building models with respect to the mechanisms by which PRS may effect change or not.
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.