Disparities in Medication Use for Criminal Justice System-Referred Opioid Use Disorder Treatment.

Importance: Individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) and criminal justice system involvement experience high rates of overdose death. Historical data point to limited use of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in criminal justice system-referred treatment for OUD as playing a role. However, how MOUD use among those referred to treatment by the criminal justice system has changed relative to other referral sources over time is still unclear, as well as how it varies across states. Objective: To examine disparities in the use of MOUD between individuals referred to treatment by the criminal justice system compared to other referral sources over time. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study included admissions to specialty substance use treatment facilities for OUD in the national Treatment Episodes Dataset-Admissions from 2014 to 2021. Logistic regression models were used to examine trends in the probability of MOUD use among individuals with and without criminal justice referrals for OUD treatment, as well as any differential trends by state. The data were analyzed from September 2023 to August 2024. Main Outcome and Measure: The main outcome was the probability that treatment for individuals with OUD included MOUD. Results: A total of 3 235 445 admissions were analyzed in the study data. Among individuals referred to OUD treatment by the criminal justice system, the probability that treatment included MOUD increased by 3.42 percentage points (pp) (95% CI, 3.37 pp to 3.47 pp) annually from 2014 to 2021. This was faster than the increase in the probability of MOUD use for noncriminal justice-referred admissions (2.49 pp [95% CI, 2.46 pp to 2.51 pp) and reduced, but did not eliminate, disparities in MOUD use between individuals with and without criminal justice system-referred treatment. In 2021, only 33.6% of individuals in criminal justice system-referred treatment received MOUD, 15.6 pp lower than for individuals referred to treatment by other sources. Trends in the probability of MOUD use varied substantially for individuals in criminal justice system-referred treatment across states, but very few experienced enough growth to eliminate this disparity. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this cross-sectional study suggest that targeted efforts to address persistent disparities in MOUD use among those with OUD and criminal justice system involvement are needed to address the poor health outcomes experienced by this population.

The use of specialized (medical) knowledge in the criminal process: the practice of the European Court of Human Rights.

OBJECTIVE: Aim: This article is aimed at raising awareness and stimulating scientific discussion on the necessity of involving qualified medical professionals in conducting criminal procedural actions that involve intervention in human somatic rights, in order to further improve the legal instruments ensuring compliance with the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter referred to as the ECHR) standards in this field. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Materials and Methods: In preparing the article, the following issues were worked out: the provisions of international legal acts; legal positions of the ECHR related to the use of medical knowledge in the criminal process; scientific studies of various aspects of the use of medical knowledge in the criminal process. The methodological basis of the research is dialectical, comparative-legal, systemic-structural, analytical, synthetic, complex research methods. CONCLUSION: Conclusions: The use of medical knowledge in the criminal process generally takes two forms: (a) expert and (b) ancillary. The expert form, particularly forensic medical examination, must adhere to a set of criteria reflected in the practice of the ECHR. Personal searches involving penetration into human body cavities generally align with the requirements of the he European Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter referred to as the Convention), provided certain conditions are met, including medical considerations. The criterion for the admissibility of coercive collection of biological samples for examination is the existence of samples independent of the individual's will.

Equity considerations in clinical practice guidelines for traumatic brain injury and the criminal justice system: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is disproportionately prevalent among individuals who intersect or are involved with the criminal justice system (CJS). In the absence of appropriate care, TBI-related impairments, intersecting social determinants of health, and the lack of TBI awareness in CJS settings can lead to lengthened sentences, serious disciplinary charges, and recidivism. However, evidence suggests that most clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) overlook equity and consequently, the needs of disadvantaged groups. As such, this review addressed the research question "To what extent are (1) intersections with the CJS considered in CPGs for TBI, (2) TBI considered in CPGs for CJS, and (3) equity considered in CPGs for CJS?". METHODS AND FINDINGS: CPGs were identified from electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO), targeted websites, Google Search, and reference lists of identified CPGs on November 2021 and March 2023 (CPGs for TBI) and May 2022 and March 2023 (CPGs for CJS). Only CPGs for TBI or CPGs for CJS were included. We calculated the proportion of CPGs that included TBI- or CJS-specific content, conducted a qualitative content analysis to understand how evidence regarding TBI and the CJS was integrated in the CPGs, and utilised equity assessment tools to understand if and how equity was considered. Fifty-seven CPGs for TBI and 6 CPGs for CJS were included in this review. Fourteen CPGs for TBI included information relevant to the CJS, but only 1 made a concrete recommendation to consider legal implications during vocational evaluation in the forensic context. Two CPGs for CJS acknowledged the prevalence of TBI among individuals in prison and one specifically recommended considering TBI during health assessments. Both CPGs for TBI and CPGs for CJS provided evidence specific to a single facet of the CJS, predominantly in policing and corrections. The use of equity best practices and the involvement of disadvantaged groups in the development process were lacking among CPGs for CJS. We acknowledge limitations of the review, including that our searches were conducted in English language and thus, we may have missed other non-English language CPGs in this review. We further recognise that we are unable to comment on evidence that is not integrated in the CPGs, as we did not systematically search for research on individuals with TBI who intersect with the CJS, outside of CPGs. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this review provide the foundation to consider CJS involvement in CPGs for TBI and to advance equity in CPGs for CJS. Conducting research, including investigating the process of screening for TBI with individuals who intersect with all facets of the CJS, and utilizing equity assessment tools in guideline development are critical steps to enhance equity in healthcare for this disadvantaged group.

How Should a Medical-Legal Partnership Address Unique Needs of People With Criminal Legal System Involvement?

Medical-legal partnerships (MLPs) are well suited to address health-harming legal needs associated with the collateral consequences of mass incarceration in the United States, such as those that limit access to food, housing, employment, and family reunification postrelease. MLP innovations seek to expand the current model to address patients' criminal, as well as postrelease, civil legal needs by including community health workers and some patients as legal partners and creating coalitions to promote local and state policy change. Overall, this article explains how these MLP innovations can support rights of people returning to communities after incarceration and can be leveraged to mitigate criminal legal system involvement.

Online paedophiles and the criminal justice experience: A qualitative perspective.

BACKGROUND: Online forums provide a conduit for anonymous communication within deviant subcultures, such as online paedophiles. This helps to build virtual communities of support. OBJECTIVE: This study explores the experience of paedophiles in the criminal justice system as reported by those who experienced it on such a forum. By analysing and understanding the experiences disclosed by these individuals, we may be able to design more targeted prevention strategies and treatment options. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Data are from one online forum discussion thread that includes 595 online forum posts by 212 unique usernames ranging over 11 years from 2012 to 2023. This forum claims to be an anonymous "therapeutic community" for paedophiles and does not allow the sharing of media (e.g., videos or images). METHODS: This study uses an inductive approach to analyse the posts and discover the perspective and concerns of users who have experienced or are faced with prosecution and punishment. RESULTS: Seven main themes emerged from the posts on this thread: support and praise, techniques of neutralisation, life in prison, anxiety and mental health, relationships, therapy, and difficulties post-prison. CONCLUSIONS: The forum provided an important source of support among a virtual community of people who shared similar sexual interest in children and feel rejected and demonised by mainstream society. The thread functioned like an "echo chamber" that reinforced a positive view of users' deviant interest. Individuals who had been prosecuted for their offending were returning to the forum, which may encourage reoffending. Parole boards and probation officers may need to consider limiting or restricting access to the Internet, particularly the Tor network, when setting release conditions. Implications for treatment focus on challenging the justifications and excuses used by paedophiles.

Improving the diagnostic value of lineup rejections.

Erroneous eyewitness identification evidence is likely the leading cause of wrongful convictions. To minimize this error, scientists recommend collecting confidence. Research shows that eyewitness confidence and accuracy are strongly related when an eyewitness identifies someone from an initial and properly administered lineup. However, confidence is far less informative of accuracy when an eyewitness identifies no one and rejects the lineup instead. In this study, I aimed to improve the confidence-accuracy relationship for lineup rejections in two ways. First, I aimed to find the lineup that yields the strongest confidence-accuracy relationship for lineup rejections by comparing the standard, simultaneous procedure used by police worldwide to the novel "reveal" procedure designed by scientists to boost accuracy. Second, I aimed to find the best method for collecting confidence. To achieve this secondary aim, I made use of machine-learning techniques to compare confidence expressed in words to numeric confidence ratings. First, I find a significantly stronger confidence-accuracy relationship for lineup rejections in the reveal than in the standard procedure regardless of the method used to collect confidence. Second, I find that confidence expressed in words captures unique diagnostic information about the likely accuracy of a lineup rejection separate from the diagnostic information captured by numeric confidence ratings. These results inform models of recognition memory and may improve the criminal-legal system by increasing the diagnostic value of a lineup rejection.

"A lot of moving parts": Recovery home challenges linking and housing individuals with criminal legal system involvement.

INTRODUCTION: There are high rates of substance use disorder (SUD) among people released from carceral settings and, upon release, many of these people also face unstable housing situations, posing challenges to connecting with resources to facilitate SUD recovery. Recovery homes provide a temporary sober living environment for those seeking both SUD recovery and transition back to the community after carceral release. However, successful recovery home placement for this population can prove difficult, and there is a need for research to identify ways to overcome them. METHODS: The current qualitative study seeks to understand barriers to recovery home access for people leaving carceral settings and identify potential best practices for overcoming these barriers from the perspective of recovery home directors. The study conducted semi-structured interviews at two data collection points with eight recovery home directors from sites participating in a housing linkage and placement intervention pilot. The research team used qualitative software to identify and organize directors' experiences and practices in housing and supporting this population. RESULTS: Recovery home directors identified significant barriers to linkage from carceral settings, including difficulties communicating and coordinating placement with potential residents while still incarcerated. Interviews also revealed approaches recovery home directors take to improve recovery home placement, such as sharing information and resources with carceral settings prior to release and helping residents avoid reincarceration by managing relationships with court agents and parole. CONCLUSION: Recovery resident directors have considerable insight into the most significant placement challenges faced by recovery homes upon carceral release as well as experience with potential solutions for overcoming them. Directors can be the key to direct seamless support and continuity of care for criminal legal system involved individuals through coordination with jails, prisons, and other community resources. Directors can also play a significant role in the successful completion of probation and parole by helping residents avoid further issues with the legal system. These directors view working cooperatively with residents as an effective approach to ensuring clients adhere to court orders and are successful in recovery and reentry.

Perinatal substance use treatment and criminal legal system referral trends.

INTRODUCTION: To guide improvements in treatment for pregnant persons with substance use disorders within the criminal legal system, treatment programs must first determine the primary substances of concern for this population. The objective of this study is to compare trends in specific substance use upon admission to treatment in pregnancy, based upon whether referrals originated from the criminal legal system or from another referral source. METHODS: This research accessed data on perinatal substance use (1995-2021) and referral sources from the Treatment Episode Data Set-Admissions (TEDS-A). Analyses use multiple logistic regressions to evaluate trends in primary substance use leading to treatment admission during pregnancy. RESULTS: Approximately 1 % (N = 536,948) of all substance use treatment admissions in TEDS-A were for pregnant people. Between 1995 and 2021, the percentage of treatment admissions increased for primary methamphetamine use (10 % to 27 %), primary opioid use (21 % to 38 %), and primary cannabis use (9 % to 18 %), and decreased for primary cocaine use (32 % to 6 %) and primary alcohol use (26 % to 11 %). By 2021, treatment admissions referred from criminal legal agencies were more likely to primarily be for primary methamphetamine use (33 % vs 25 %) and less likely to be for primary opioid use (22 % vs 42 %) compared to other referral sources. CONCLUSIONS: Trends in substance use treatment during pregnancy have changed substantially over the past few decades and emphasize the unique needs of patients referred to treatment by the criminal legal system. Treatment programs must therefore adapt to fluctuating trends in perinatal substance use. In particular, it is important to expand programs that prioritize treatment of methamphetamine use disorder for pregnant people referred through criminal legal agencies.

The effect of confession evidence on jurors' verdict decisions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Over the past 4 decades, discrepant research findings have emerged in the juror-confession literature, prompting the need for a systematic review and meta-analysis that assesses the effect of confession evidence (coerced or noncoerced) on conviction rates and the efficacy of trial safeguards. HYPOTHESES: We did not predict any directional hypotheses. Some studies show increased convictions when a confession is present (vs. not), regardless of whether that confession was coerced; other studies demonstrate that jurors are able to discount coerced confessions. Studies have also demonstrated sensitivity effects (safeguards aided jurors in making appropriate decisions), skepticism effects (safeguards led jurors to indiscriminately disregard confession evidence), or null effects with regard to expert testimony and jury instructions. METHOD: We identified 83 independent samples (N = 24,860) that met our meta-analytic inclusion criteria. Using extracted Hedges' g effect sizes, we conducted both network meta-analysis and metaregression to address key research questions. RESULTS: Coerced and noncoerced confessions (vs. no confession) increased convictions (network gs = 0.34 and 0.70, respectively), yet coerced (vs. noncoerced) confessions reduced convictions (network g = -0.36). When jury instructions were employed (vs. not), convictions in coerced confession cases were reduced (this difference did not emerge for noncoerced confessions; a sensitivity effect). Expert testimony, however, reduced conviction likelihood regardless of whether a confession was coerced (a skepticism effect). CONCLUSION: Confession evidence is persuasive, and although jurors appear to recognize the detrimental effect of coercive interrogation methods on confession reliability, they do not fully discount unreliable confessions. Educational safeguards are therefore needed, but more research is encouraged to identify the most effective forms of jury instructions and expert testimony. One potential reform could be in the interrogation room itself, as science-based interviewing approaches could provide jurors with more reliable defendant statement evidence that assists them in reaching appropriate verdict decisions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Court-reported competence to proceed data across the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Competence to proceed (CTP) is a constitutional protection intended to facilitate fairness and dignity of court proceedings. Researchers have estimated that between 60,000 and 94,000 defendants are evaluated for CTP each year. Yet no research has systematically identified the number of evaluations conducted each year, despite their critical role and many profound implications. We used large-scale, systematic data collection to address this knowledge gap. HYPOTHESES: Given the siloed nature of the judicial and forensic mental health systems, we anticipated incomplete data and that the number of evaluations would far exceed previous estimates. METHOD: In September 2019, we used public information requests to solicit CTP evaluation order data from the judiciaries of 50 U.S. states, the District of Columbia, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons. We accepted evaluation proxies, such as evaluations ordered or evaluations filed, from the 2018/2019 calendar/fiscal year. We used Uniform Crime Reporting data to estimate a nationwide evaluation-to-arrest ratio and annual evaluation volume. RESULTS: Twenty-five states provided data. We deemed data from 18 states acceptable while acknowledging that data likely underrepresented actual evaluation volume. By extrapolating data from these 18 states, we estimated a conservative national evaluation-to-arrest ratio of 0.015 (95% confidence interval [-0.007, 0.037]), which suggested that 15 evaluations are conducted per 1,000 arrests each year. Consequently, it seems likely that at least 140,000 evaluations are ordered each year nationwide, with several hundred people referred for evaluations each day. CONCLUSIONS: Annual CTP evaluation volume likely far exceeds previous estimates. Transparent data are difficult, if not impossible, to obtain. As a result, researchers, legal and forensic mental health professionals, and policymakers lack the ability to implement informed, constitutionally protected CTP practices. Key implications, research directions, and detailed data infrastructure recommendations are provided. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

How the risk principle reduces recidivism: The impact of legislative revisions on the release and reoffense rates of individuals convicted of sexual offenses.

OBJECTIVE: The present study examined the relationship between legislative revisions regarding sexual offenses and the release decisions and recidivism rates of individuals convicted of sexual offenses. In 2008, the Austrian government passed a package of revised criminal laws aiming to decrease incarceration rates. At the same time, connecting recidivism risk to professional risk management efforts was expected to increase public safety. HYPOTHESES: Given the strong empirical background of the implemented risk assessment and management efforts, we expected both an increase in the percentage of conditional release decisions and a decrease in recidivism rates. METHOD: We analyzed the data of 2,610 male individuals convicted of sexual offenses who were released from the Austrian Prison System between 2001 and 2016 within a natural experiment using a prospective-longitudinal quasi-experimental study design. RESULTS: The results indicated that the percentage of conditional releases of individuals convicted of sexual offenses increased substantially since 2008. Additionally, within the same period, the recidivism rates of individuals convicted of sexual offenses decreased further. CONCLUSION: Even if both developmental processes are only correlational and a causal relationship cannot be examined, the present results supported the empirical evidence of the risk principle-at least if it is based on scientifically sound risk assessment and management methods. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Bio-behavioral scientific evidence alters judges' sentencing decision-making: A quantitative analysis.

The present study surveyed judges to examine how they consider and apply scientific information during sentencing determinations. Judges in criminal courts are increasingly asked to assess and make decisions based on evidence surrounding psychiatric disorders, with unclear results on sentencing outcomes. We qualitatively interviewed 34 judges who have presided over criminal cases in 16 different states and also administered vignette surveys during the interviews. We asked them to make sentencing decisions for hypothetical defendants in cases presenting evidence of either no psychiatric disorder, an organic brain disorder, or past trauma, as well as to rate the importance of different goals of sentencing for each case. Results indicated that the case presenting no evidence of a mental health condition received significantly more severe sentences as compared to either psychiatric condition. Judges' ratings of sentencing goals showed that the importance of retribution was a significant mediator of this relationship. Trauma was not deemed to be as mitigating as an organic brain disorder. These results provide unique insights into how judges assess cases and consider sentencing outcomes when presented with scientific information to explicate defendants' behavior. We propose ways forward that may help better integrate scientific understandings of behavior into criminal justice decision-making.

"What I should be doing is harm reduction, if I'm doing my job right": Engagement with harm reduction principles among prosecutors enacting drug policy reform in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Prosecutorial discretion to pursue or decline criminal charges is a powerful mechanism determining criminal justice outcomes among people who use drugs (PWUD). In the US, prosecutors are increasingly employing this tool to prevent arrest, incarceration, and subsequent health and social harms among PWUD. Many cite harm reduction as a basis for these reforms; however, the extent of prosecutors' knowledge and understanding of harm reduction principles, and how they are operationalized in the policy process, remains unclear. METHODS: We assess references to and application of harm reduction in the policy design and implementation process of prosecutorial drug policy reform in 14 US jurisdictions. In-depth-interviews (N = 16) were conducted with elected prosecutors and their policy staff from November 2021-April 2022. Through initial structured analysis, policymakers' understanding and utilization of the term 'harm reduction' emerged as a salient theme which we conducted secondary thematic analysis to further explore. RESULTS: While all participants identified as progressive, there was wide variation in their ideologies, policy provisions, and engagement with harm reduction principles. Eleven participants explicitly referred to 'reducing harms of drug use' or 'harm reduction' as guiding their policy approach; the remainder did not invoke 'harm reduction' by name but highlighted relevant concepts like racial equity and 'public health approaches' as core policy tenets. While some prosecutors demonstrated familiarity with traditional harm reduction principles (meeting PWUD where they are, reducing harms to them), others focused on harm to the wider community (the 'public,' businesses, etc). Invocation of harm reduction was not always consistent with specific policy provisions: prosecutors implemented policies ranging from unconditional non-prosecution of drug possession to diversion, some of which were odds with core harm reduction principles of dignity and justice (i.e., involving coercive treatment incentives/requirements). CONCLUSIONS: As prosecutors shift their approach to redress the harms caused by drug criminalization, clarity is needed on what a harm reduction approach to using discretionary powers entails. Targeting reform-minded prosecutors with messaging on the principles, evidence base, and best practices of harm reduction is merited.

Operationalization of Status Neutral Human Immunodeficiency Virus Care for Criminal-Legal Involved Populations.

The United States has the highest number of people incarcerated in the world. Criminal-legal involved populations, including people who are incarcerated in jails and prisons and people who are under community carceral control through probation or parole are at an increased risk for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Increasing access to HIV testing, treatment and prevention is necessary to curb the HIV epidemic. This chapter outlines the history of HIV testing in jails and prisons and suggests a Status Neutral HIV Care Framework for improving access to HIV prevention services.

Probation practice and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder.

RATIONALE: Twenty-one Community Rehabilitation Companies were set up following the division of the National Probation Services during 'Transforming Rehabilitation' in England and Wales, under a 2013 Ministry of Justice initiative. Reunification commenced in 2018. A study completed prior to these changes suggested that probation officers had had little training in recognising attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and may have been underestimating its prevalence among their clientele. Given the substantial changes in probation staffing and organisation since 2018, a new study seems warranted. AIMS: The aim of the study was to understand experiences of people under a community sentence who reported having ADHD and of probation staff working with them. METHODS: Using a qualitative research design, one-to-one semi-structured interviews were conducted with client facing probation staff recruited from one Community Rehabilitation Company. Service users undertaking a community sentence who had been diagnosed with or self-identified as having ADHD were then identified and recruited by these staff; those who consented were also interviewed. Transcripts were analysed using a thematic analytic approach. RESULTS: Thirteen probation staff and six male offenders under community sentences, agreed to participate and completed interviews. The overarching themes emerging from the two groups were similar, both reflecting on descriptions of ADHD; treatment of ADHD; experiences of having or working with ADHD in the wider community and in the criminal justice system specifically and visions of future support needs tied to the order. In addition, probation officers specifically raised the matter of payment by results. Both service users and probation staff identified gaps in knowledge, experience and services, but areas of good practice were also identified. CONCLUSION: The findings highlight the continuing under-acknowledgement of tailored clinical support for people serving a community sentence who have ADHD together with a lack of support and training about ADHD for probation staff. Return to the national organisation of probation services and recognition of need for a range of relevant skills offers a great opportunity for re-evaluating supervision and management of offenders under community sentences who have ADHD. These findings provide the basis for a template for developing knowledge and support provision for probation staff to recognise ADHD, or its likelihood, and their capacity to follow through with appropriately informed personalised supervision plans and access to specialist service advice and support.

Therapeutic and non-therapeutic practices in the child justice system in Kenya: A therapeutic jurisprudence perspective.

Child justice systems are specialized jurisdictions set up for the purpose of providing justice related services to children. In an effort to resolve many of the systemic injustices expereinced by justice involved children, Kenya recently legislated the Children Act 2022. This new law is viewed as a paradigm shift from previous children acts as it incorporates constitutional provisions, UN conventions, minimum rules and other international protocols that Kenya is a state party to. The Act seeks to transform the child justice system into a jurisdiction which is more amenable to prioritising the mental wellbeing of children. The current study sought to examine the practices applied by state child justice agencies and whether these were therapeutic or non- therapeutic. This would clarify areas where the Act may need to be amended or reviewed to further its own goals. The findings revealed that the most non-therapeutic procedures centred on the courtroom such as the formal court environment and children facing perpetrators in court as well as limited access to mental health services. Therapeutic practices included ensuring children access treatment, use of child friendly interviewing techniques and testifying in camera. These may guide justice actors as to how they apply the Children Act 2022 within their own contexts whilst developing rules and standards that embody the principles of therapeutic jurisprudence.

Criminal Justice and People With Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.

People with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) are overrepresented in the criminal justice system both as victims/survivors and as offenders. The needs and circumstances of individuals from underserved communities have received scant attention in the literature. Stakeholders met online at the 2022 State of the Science Conference on Community Living to discuss criminal justice and to identify goals for research involving people with IDD. The group focused more on victimization and less on offenders. Victimization issues examined included prevalence, people from underserved communities, sexual victimization, consequences of victimization, victim compensation, prevention, and risk reduction. Issues regarding offenders included prevalence, people from underserved communities, and competency to stand trial. Future directions are proposed for research on victimization and on offenders.

Risk factors for dropout from psychological substance use disorder treatment programs in criminal justice settings.

BACKGROUND: Substance use disorders are highly prevalent in people within the criminal justice system. Psychological programs are the most common type of treatment available and have been shown to decrease recidivism, but dropping out of treatment is common. Risk factors associated with treatment dropout remain unclear in this setting, and whether the risk factors differ by treatment form (group-based vs. individual). METHODS: Outcome (treatment dropout) was defined as not finishing the program due to client's own wish, misbehavior, no-shows, or because program leader found client to be unsuitable. Predictors of treatment dropout included a comprehensive set of individual-level clinical, socioeconomic, and crime-related pre-treatment characteristics. Multivariable regression models were used to estimate the associations between predictors and dropout. FINDINGS: The study cohort included 5239 criminal justice clients who participated in a psychological treatment program (group-based or individual). Multivariable logistic regression models showed that female sex (OR=1.64, 95% CI 1.20-2.25), age (0.99, [0.97-1.00]), sentence length (0.98, [0.97-0.98]), higher education (0.54, [0.28-1.00]), number of violent offenses (1.03, [1.01-1.05]), and anxiety disorders (1.32, [1.01-1.72]) were associated with dropout from the individual treatment program. For the group-based program, age (OR=0.98, 95% CI 0.96-1.00), sentence length (OR=0.96, 95% CI 0.94-0.98), stimulant use disorder (OR=1.48, 95%, 1.00-2.19), and self-harm (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.00-2.34) were associated with dropout. CONCLUSIONS: We identified certain sociodemographic, crime-related, and clinical characteristics that were particularly important in predicting dropout from psychological treatment. Further, we find that there are similarities and differences in predictors of dropout from group-based and individual treatment forms.

Juvenile Justice-Based Interdisciplinary Collective Care: An Innovative Approach.

Mental health concerns among juvenile-justice-involved youth (JJIY) continue to be a major health crisis in the United States (US). While scholarship has explored mental health concerns among JJIY, and the link to negative life outcomes, there are gaps in the existing research, particularly in effective interventions and models aimed at addressing both the mental health concerns and criminogenic risk contributing to recidivism and other negative life outcomes of this population. In this paper, we present Justice-Based Interdisciplinary Collective Care (JBICC), an innovative framework to address both the mental health needs and delinquent behavior of youth offenders. The model bridges community partners, with the purpose of informing future interventions, implementations, and research in this area. Increased justice-based interdisciplinary collective collaboration between the juvenile justice system and community programs/organizations would be a major benefit to youth offenders and their families. We also focus on the need for cultural responsiveness to be interwoven throughout all aspects of treatment. JBICC offers an opportunity to expanded services outside traditional settings and methods to ensure that youth offenders and their families receive validating and culturally responsive access to services.