ArticleCriminal behaviour and mental health : CBMH2025
Does the Implementation of a Model of Care Improve the Value for Money of Mental Health Services in Prisons?
Article in Criminal behaviour and mental health : CBMH, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Does the Implementation of a Model of Care Improve the Value for Money of Mental Health Services in Prisons?Criminal behaviour and mental health : CBMH · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is little research into appropriate measures of value for money in prison mental health services.
aimsTo develop and evaluate an accountability framework for an enhanced Prison Model of Care for people with serious mental illness in five New Zealand prisons. A key objective was to identify people with such illnesses who were missing from existing caseloads.
methodsA generic public sector accountability framework was modified to provide measures of value for money around efficiency in its three component criteria of effectiveness and economy using a pre/post design, allowing measurement of flows between successive stages of this prison healthcare model. Measures were arranged into common dimensions around outcomes, outputs, inputs and costs, varied across the stages. The framework was populated with data collected from five prisons for the pre- and post-implementation periods.
resultsImprovements in the three criteria were generally obtained across all five areas of service delivery but especially in the screening, assessment, intervention and reintegration stages. Since these three criteria are major components of value for money, they provide evidence for improvement in value for money of the mental health services in these prisons. Other desired operational changes achieved were a threefold increase in the nurse to doctor ratio at the triage stage and slight increase in doctor to nurse ratio at the treatment stage. Overall, the implementation of this model of care achieved an increase in the size of caseload from 6.1% to 7.3% of the prison muster, equivalent to an increase in caseload of 21%.
conclusionsThis accountability framework confirmed the value for money of the Prison Model of Care for severe mental illness, highlighting areas of good performance as well as areas requiring further development. The framework also provides measures that can be used as key performance indicators in ongoing monitoring.
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.