ArticleBMC health services research2025
Use of data-driven decision-making among agencies serving individuals with criminal-legal system involvement: a qualitative study.
Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Implementation mechanisms used in national efforts to improve community services to keep individuals with mental illness out of local jails.Implementation science communications · 2025Article
- Strengthening community services to keep individuals with mental illness out of jail: a qualitative analysis of implementation mechanisms in 52 U.S. Counties.Health & justice · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundData-driven decision-making is an implementation strategy to improve system performance and health outcomes for individuals with substance use and mental health needs interacting with criminal-legal systems. We currently have limited understanding of how agencies define and use data in their decision-making processes. A qualitative study was conducted with agency leaders from jails, probation and parole, and community mental health and substance use service agencies to characterize (1) how respondents defined data and data use, (2) current level of data use for decision-making, (3) data capacity needs, and (4) agency perspectives on best practices and their recommendations.
methodsIn-depth interviews were conducted with 68 mental health, substance use, jail, and probation leaders from a representative group of 52 U.S. counties from December 2020-March 2022. Data were analyzed using applied thematic analysis.
resultsFour themes emerged. For defining data and data use, respondents characterized their current level of data use as rudimentary. In terms of current level of data use, individual-level health or legal information needed to coordinate services, and risk prediction scores were used over system measures. Data capacity needs identified as capacity to track and share data across agencies and inadequate data management. In terms of best practices and agency recommendations, participants highlighted the need for data sharing, standardized data management systems, data dashboards, and in-house data expertise.
conclusionFindings from this study highlight the limited capacity of counties to implement data-driven decision making in mental health, substance use, and criminal legal settings. Addressing gaps in infrastructure, staffing, and data expertise will require technical assistance and targeted policy incentives. System-level metrics and benchmarks, such as the cascade of care, are essential for evaluating cross-agency performance and improving outcomes for individuals with mental health needs.
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.