ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2026
Implementing a peer navigation program for individuals with serious mental illness in the criminal legal system: insights and lessons learned.
Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2026. 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
backgroundPeer-provided services play a crucial role in healthcare delivery across health care issues. This study describes the process of implementing a peer navigation program called mentoring and peer support (MAPS) for individuals with serious mental illness (SMI) reentering the community after jail release.
methodsIn-depth interviews were conducted with four peer navigators, and the 12-item Working Alliance Inventory Scale was used to assess their perspectives on the program. Additionally, 25 administrative documents were reviewed to describe implementation processes. An applied thematic analysis was conducted using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).
resultsResults from qualitative exit interviews, the Working Alliance Inventory survey, and administrative reviews indicate that the MAPS program was feasible, acceptable, and culturally appropriate. However, opinions on its effectiveness were mixed. Peer navigators faced challenges accessing clients in jail due to facility lockdowns and short staffing. They also encountered client skepticism, as some initially mistook them for law enforcement or probation officers. Maintaining post-release contact was difficult due to unreliable phone numbers and unstable housing. Recommendations include aligning jail release times with community service hours, diversifying participant incentives, and employing full-time peer navigators for greater flexibility.
conclusionPeer navigation programs like MAPS hold promise for enhancing mental health service linkage among reentering individuals. Stronger post-release support systems and clearer role definitions to mitigate client distrust would advance implementation. Findings from this study will inform implementation of an adequately powered randomized trial evaluating effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the MAPS intervention.
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.