Dataset Information

Comparing Public Safety Outcomes for Traditional Probation vs Specialty Mental Health Probation.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Probation is a cornerstone of efforts to reduce mass incarceration. Although it is understudied, specialty probation could improve outcomes for the overrepresented group of people with mental illness.

Objective

To test whether specialty probation yields better public safety outcomes than traditional probation.

Design, setting, and participants

A longitudinal observational study with group matching on age, sex, race/ethnicity, probation time, and offense at 2 urban agencies that exemplify specialty and traditional probation. Enrollment began October 19, 2005; follow-up data were complete January 26, 2013. Participants were 359 diverse probationers with serious mental health problems and functional impairment. Probationers and officers were assessed 3 times (for probationers, 6-month retention, 315 of 359 [88%]; 12-month retention 304 of 359 [85%]) and follow-up records were obtained. Machine learning algorithms were combined with a targeted maximum likelihood estimation, a double robust estimator that accounts for associations between confounders and both treatment assignment and outcomes. Statistical analysis was conducted from January 1, 2016 to May 5, 2017.

Interventions

Specialty probationers were assigned to small, homogeneous caseloads supervised by experts. Prior data indicate that specialty officers had better relationships with probationers, participated more in probationers' treatment, and relied more on positive compliance strategies than traditional officers.

Main outcomes and measures

Violence during 1 year, determined by probationer report, officer report, and records, and rearrest during a period of 2 to 5 years, according to Federal Bureau of Investigation records.

Results

Participants were 183 specialty (73.8% of 248 eligible) and 176 traditional (56.6% of 311 eligible) probationers (205 men and 154 women; mean [SD] age, 36.9 [10.6]). Although specialty probation had no significant effect on violence (odds ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.69-1.36), the odds of rearrest were 2.68 times higher for traditional probationers than for specialty probationers (95% CI, 1.86-3.84; P?Conclusions and relevanceAlthough it did not specifically reduce violence, well-implemented specialty probation appears to be effective in reducing general recidivism. Reform efforts for people with mental illness could leverage probation-a ubiquitous and revitalized node of the justice system.

SUBMITTER: Skeem JL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5710232 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparing Public Safety Outcomes for Traditional Probation vs Specialty Mental Health Probation.

Skeem Jennifer L JL Manchak Sarah S Montoya Lina L

JAMA psychiatry 20170901 9

<h4>Importance</h4>Probation is a cornerstone of efforts to reduce mass incarceration. Although it is understudied, specialty probation could improve outcomes for the overrepresented group of people with mental illness.<h4>Objective</h4>To test whether specialty probation yields better public safety outcomes than traditional probation.<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4>A longitudinal observational study with group matching on age, sex, race/ethnicity, probation time, and offense at 2 urba ...[more]

PMID: 28793147

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNumerous determinants have been linked to public mental health; however, they have not been brought together in a comprehensive conceptual framework. The goal of this work was to bring together academic research, practitioner expertise, and public perspectives to create a public mental health conceptual framework.MethodsThe development process proceeded in four stages. First, we identified a comprehensive list of potential determinants through a state-of-the-art academic literature review, grey literature review, and created mind maps created by peer researchers. Next, we conducted in-person workshops, consultations, and an online survey with academics, practitioners, policy makers, and members of the public to review the potential determinants, nominate additional determinants, and prioritise determinants by importance for understanding public mental health. This iterative process resulted in the final list of determinants contained in the framework. We then conducted rapid reviews to define each determinant and to identify key research, interventions, and resources. Finally, we worked with a design team to visualise the conceptual framework as an online tool and printable infographic.ResultsWe found substantial overlap between sources reflecting a shared understanding of the key drivers of public mental health. The unique determinants that emerged from each data source highlighted the importance of using multiple sources to create a comprehensive model. 72 potential determinants were prioritised through stakeholder consultations, resulting in a final list of 55 determinants and organised into four levels: individual, family, community, and structural.ConclusionsThis is the most complete conceptual framework for public mental health to date, bringing together academic research, policy and practitioner views, and lived experience perspectives. The co-production processes and tools we used provides a template for researchers looking to include multiple perspectives in their research. The conceptual framework draws together current knowledge on each determinant, but also highlights areas where further research is needed to better understand the relationship between each factor and mental health, which can inform the research agenda. This online tool and infographic can be used by practitioners to identify interventions for promoting mental health, and by the general public as a resource to increase awareness of the broad factors which shape public mental health.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough national policies in China are comprehensive and instructive, a wide disparity exists between different cities. The current status of public mental health services by region in China remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate policies related to public mental health services, the contact coverage of public mental health services and outcomes of service users.MethodsA cross-sectional study was carried out in Southern China, between April 2021 and March 2022. Considering the geographical location, socioeconomic development levels, and prevalence of severe mental illness, four cities including Wuhan, Changsha, Guangzhou, and Shenzhen were selected. Relevant service providers were asked to report data on mental health policies and facility-related information, including mental health resources, registration rates of patients, management rates of patients, and medication rates of patients. Eligible patients were invited to report service user-related data, including contact coverage of public mental health services and their outcomes. SPSS 26.0 was used for data analysis.ResultsThe four cities in Southern China have made different efforts to develop public mental health services, primarily focusing on socio-economically disadvantaged individuals. Community health centers in Guangzhou and Shenzhen reported having more professional human resources on mental health and higher mental health budgets for patients. The contact coverage rates of most public mental services were higher than 80%. Patients in Changsha (B = 0.3; 95%CI: 0.1-0.5), Guangzhou (B = 0.2; 95%CI: 0.1-0.3), and Shenzhen (B = 0.3; 95%CI: 0.1-0.4) who received social medical assistance services reported higher levels of medication adherence. Patients in Wuhan (B = -6.5; 95%CI: -12.9--0.1), Guangzhou (B = -2.8; 95%CI: -5.5--0.1), and Shenzhen who received community-based rehabilitation services reported lower levels of disability (B = -2.6; 95%CI: -4.6--0.5).ConclusionsThere have been advances in public mental health services in the four Southern cities. The contact coverage rates of most public mental health services were higher than 80%. Patients' utilization of public mental services was associated with better health outcomes. To improve the quality of public mental health services, the government should try to engage service users, their family members, and supporters in the design, delivery, operationalization, and evaluation of these public mental health services in the future.

Project description:IntroductionPublic safety personnel (PSP; e.g., communications officials [e.g., 911 call center operators/dispatchers], correctional service employees, firefighters, paramedics, police officers) experience an elevated risk for mental disorders due to inherent work-related stress. Several programs have been designed to increase mental health knowledge, intending to reduce stigma, and increase mental health service help-seeking (e.g., resilience training); however, extant programs have not demonstrated sustained improvements for PSP mental health. The current study assessed levels of mental health knowledge, stigma, and service use intentions in a sample of Canadian PSP and compared trends to published estimates of mental health symptoms across PSP categories to inform future programming.MethodsPSP completed questionnaires assessing mental health knowledge, stigma against coworkers with mental illness, and professional service use intentions. Correlations among variables and one-way analyses of variance were conducted to assess differences among categories. PSP were categorized into six categories for comparison: communication officials, correctional workers, firefighters, municipal/provincial police, paramedics, and Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP).ResultsThere were significant differences between categories for each variable. Correctional workers reported the most mental health knowledge, least stigma, and highest intentions to use mental health services, and the highest positive screens for mental disorders. Conversely, firefighters reported the lowest mental health knowledge, highest stigma, and lowest willingness to seek professional help, and the lowest prevalence of positive screens for mental disorders.DiscussionThe results contrast previously hypothesized associations among mental health variables where education, stigma reduction, and help-seeking have been expected to improve mental health. The discrepant results offer potentially critical information for organizational policies to better support PSP. Individuals reporting mental health symptoms may be a more appropriate target audience for intervention strategies, given the possible, crucial role personal experience plays in increasing mental health knowledge, and ultimately, encouraging help-seeking.

Dataset Information

Comparing Public Safety Outcomes for Traditional Probation vs Specialty Mental Health Probation.

Importance

Objective

Design, setting, and participants

Interventions

Main outcomes and measures

Results

Publications

Comparing Public Safety Outcomes for Traditional Probation vs Specialty Mental Health Probation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets