Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40817958›Full record

ArticleHealth & justice2025

A longitudinal mixed methods social network analysis to evaluate a peer-led housing program for older men returning from incarceration: Study protocol & pre-implementation results.

Brandy F Henry, Derek A Kreager, Joy Gray, Kristina Brant, Gary Zajac, Divine Lipscomb, Sarah Brothers, David R Schaefer, Nicolette Bardele, Andrea Hazelwood

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Health & justice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Brandy F HenryPennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA. BrandyHenry@psu.edu.
Derek A KreagerPennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
Joy GrayPennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
Kristina BrantPennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
Gary ZajacPennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
Divine LipscombPennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
Sarah BrothersPennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
David R SchaeferUniversity of California Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA.
Nicolette BardelePennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
Andrea HazelwoodPennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.

Funding

National Institute on Aging of the National Institutes of Health R56AG089102
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe describe a longitudinal mixed methods program evaluation protocol for a novel peer-led housing program for older men transitioning from prison to the community after completing long sentences of incarceration. The program departs from traditional community corrections models by providing peer-run housing designed to build and enhance peer and community social ties. This previously untested program relies on the principles of network alteration and provides a case study for examining interpersonal mechanisms underlying behavioral health and justice related outcomes.

methodsWe use mixed methods and longitudinal social network analysis to evaluate the program, while also applying implementation science to document program development. We focus our evaluation on key health and social outcomes, including mental health, substance use, stress, health risk behaviors, well-being, financial security, housing, and recidivism. With longitudinal surveys, we collect (1) dynamic network data of resident and staff relationships and (2) behavioral health/social data of participants. We also administer longitudinal resident and staff interviews. Resident interviews focus on interpersonal relationships and reentry experiences, while staff interviews describe program implementation. We apply longitudinal statistical models to complete (i.e., sociocentric) network data within the house to examine how dynamic network properties connect to changes in residents' health, behavioral, and social outcomes. We integrate longitudinal survey, individual-level (i.e., egocentric) network, and qualitative data to understand how the program works. To evaluate program impacts for long-term health and social outcomes, we use an untreated matched sample to compare 6- and 12-months post-prison release outcomes using administrative data related to rearrest/reincarceration and behavioral health. PRE-IMPLEMENTATION

resultsWe use a logic model to present and organize pre-implementation results from interviews with program staff and peer mentors. Our results describe program design and intended goals, while highlighting how the program is rooted in principles of peer support, trauma-informed care, and restorative justice to address unique stressors of incarceration to foster responsibility and facilitate reintegration. DISCUSSION: Community program evaluation research allows us to document real-world contextual factors that may drive intervention effectiveness. Results of the mixed methods evaluation will provide a comprehensive understanding of one network-based program's ability to support health and social outcomes of older, previously incarcerated men. Results may inform future reentry services.

Indexed as

HousingImplementation scienceIncarcerationMental healthMixed methodsPeer supportProgram evaluationReentrySocial networksSubstance use

Identifiers

PMID40817958
PMCPMC12357394

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.