ArticleJournal of public health management and practice : JPHMP
The Ties That Bind: The Relationships Among Members in Nine Ohio HEALing Communities Coalitions.
Article in Journal of public health management and practice : JPHMP. 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
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
contextCommunity coalitions in 9 Ohio counties implementing the Communities that Heal (CTH) intervention to reduce opioid overdose deaths in the HEALing Communities Study (HCS).
objectiveTo evaluate 9 Ohio HCS coalition network structures using social network analyses to assess organizational positionality (eg, connectedness, centrality, density), perceptions of value and trust, and associations between positionality and trust and value.
designWith Visual Networks Lab (VNL), cross-sectional data were collected during the early intervention from August 31, 2022, to November 8, 2022, using a validated survey tool and Program to Analyze, Record, and Track, Networks to Enhance Relationships (PARTNER) to measure organizational connections and attributes.
settingNine counties located throughout Ohio that were randomized into the second wave of the HCS.
participants153 member organizations from across the 9 Ohio coalitions. Coalition size ranged from 16 to 27 member organizations. No organization served on more than one coalition.
main outcome measuresCount of organizational partnerships (ties), perceived value, and trust scores.
resultsCoalition structure varied across counties, displayed in network maps indicating the number and type of connections by organization. At the coalition level, the mean number of ties ranged from 2.94 to 7.13. Coalition connectedness (density) ranged from low (0.17) to moderate (0.31). Mean trust scores were higher: 3.25 to 3.53 (of 4) while mean value scores ranged from lower to fair: 2.61 to 3.07 (of 4). Degree centrality (most connections) ranged from 0.3 to 0.6; closeness centrality (shorter connections) ranged from 0.2 to 0.5. Trust and value were correlated in 8 coalitions; associations among centrality, trust, and value scores varied considerably.
conclusionVariations in coalition structures likely reflect differences in community context. Understanding coalition structure, including by sector, and perceptions of trust and value, may enhance coalition leadership's ability to improve collaboration and enhance coalition capacity to meet objectives.
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.