SynthesisFrontiers in public health2025
Recovery housing and on-the-ground research priorities: a scoping study through the lens of community based participatory research.
Synthesis in Frontiers in public health, 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Though communities have featured recovery housing (RH) for several decades, the base of evidence for best practices continues to grow - especially evidence needed by, and known to, those who operate and receive these services. The Initiative for Justice and Emerging Adult Populations (JEAP) engaged with three community boards (CBs) - consisting of young adults with experience in recovery from substance use issues, people who have a history of criminal legal system involvement and recovery, and payers and provider of substance use services and harm reduction - to understand on-the-ground priorities for research into recovery support services. Methods: JEAP engaged with the CBs using community-based participatory research, resulting in 12 overarching categories of research priorities, including RH. Each category contains a general problem statement, as well as testable research questions stemming from the priorities identified by the CBs. It remains to be seen, though, if research has answered them. This study used these research questions as the basis for an adapted scoping study, querying extant literature on these research priorities. Results: These efforts resulted Our search found 132 peer-reviewed studies of RH since 1984, 111 of these pertaining to the CB's research questions. These, however, were heavily weighted toward those providing fewer services and supervision (80%), and the research questions focused on RH operations (57%), though more recent efforts have investigated populations served (37%). Discussion: Though many RH studies fell within JEAP research questions, the literature has yet to reach an overarching consensus on best practices within each. Given the high degree of variation between types of RH programs and between geographic locations, such consensus may not be feasible or even desirable. Key elements of effective RH operations are discussed providing useful information for both researchers and practitioners to consider, as well as recommendations for future research.
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.