ArticleEvaluation and program planning2025
Characteristics of mandates for evidence-based behavioral health interventions in 8 selected US states.
Article in Evaluation and program planning, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeDemand for the use of evidence-based interventions (EBI) to address behavioral health issues remains high in the United States. States are primarily tasked with determining what constitutes EBIs on a state-by-state basis. This results in variations in what constitutes an EBI across states. The study's purpose is to determine the different ways in which state mandates for EBIs operationalize the concept of EBI, including the different levels of evidence that are required. The EBI mandates of 8 states were purposively selected for this study based on their Pew Charitable Trusts rating of EBI implementation.
results64 % of EBI operationalizations included a quality of evidence requirement and 74 % included an impact reporting requirement. 52 % included both types of requirements, 35 % featured one type of requirement or the other, and 14 % included neither type of requirement. There was variation in the content of those requirements depending on the implied tier of evidence and the state's PMC rating category.
conclusionsStates need consistent operationalizations of what constitutes an EBI if they are to support the implementation of effective programming for behavioral health care. Additionally, states should produce more rigorous research-based operationalizations of what constitutes an EBI.
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.