Mental health interventions for individuals with serious mental illness in the criminal legal system: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Globally, individuals with mental illness get in contact with the law at a greater rate than the general population. The goal of this review was to identify and describe: (1) effectiveness of mental health interventions for individuals with serious mental illness (SMI) who have criminal legal involvement; (2) additional outcomes targeted by these interventions; (3) settings/contexts where interventions were delivered; and (4) barriers and facilitating factors for implementing these interventions. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted to summarize the mental health treatment literature for individuals with serious mental illness with criminal legal involvement (i.e., bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, major depressive disorder). Searches were conducted using PsychINFO, Embase, ProQuest, PubMed, and Web of Science. Articles were eligible if they were intervention studies among criminal legal involved populations with a mental health primary outcome and provided description of the intervention. RESULTS: A total of 13 eligible studies were identified. Tested interventions were categorized as cognitive/behavioral, community-based, interpersonal (IPT), psychoeducational, or court-based. Studies that used IPT-based interventions reported clinically significant improvements in mental health symptoms and were also feasible and acceptable. Other interventions demonstrated positive trends favoring the mental health outcomes but did not show statistically and clinically significant changes. All studies reported treatment outcomes, with only 8 studies reporting both treatment and implementation outcomes. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight a need for more mental health research in this population. Studies with randomized design, larger sample size and studies that utilize non-clinicians are needed.

Using publicly available data to predict recreational cannabis legalization at the county-level: A machine learning approach.

BACKGROUND: There is substantial geographic variability in local cannabis policies within states that have legalized recreational cannabis. This study develops an interpretable machine learning model that uses county-level population demographics, sociopolitical factors, and estimates of substance use and mental illness prevalences to predict the legality of recreational cannabis sales within each U.S. county. METHODS: We merged data and selected 14 model inputs from the 2010 Census, 2012 County Presidential Data from the MIT Elections Lab, and Small Area Estimates from the National Surveys on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) from 2010 to 2012 at the county level. County policies were labeled as having recreational cannabis legal (RCL) if the sale of recreational cannabis was allowed anywhere in the county in 2014, resulting in 92 RCL and 3002 non-RCL counties. We used synthetic data augmentation and minority oversampling techniques to build an ensemble of 1000 logistic regressions on random sub-samples of the data, withholding one state at a time and building models from all remaining states. Performance was evaluated by comparing the predicted policy conditions with the actual outcomes in 2014. RESULTS: When compared to the actual RCL policies in 2014, the ensemble estimated predictions of counties transitioning to RCL had a macro f1 average score of 0.61. The main factors associated with legalizing county-level recreational cannabis sales were the prevalences of past-month cannabis use and past-year cocaine use. CONCLUSION: By leveraging publicly available data from 2010 to 2012, our model was able to achieve appreciable discrimination in predicting counties with legal recreational cannabis sales in 2014, however, there is room for improvement. Having demonstrated model performance in the first handful of states to legalize cannabis, additional testing with more recent data using time to event models is warranted.

Cannabis Policy in the 21st Century: Mandating an Equitable Future and Shedding the Racist Past.

The cannabis legalization movement in the United States has experienced unprecedented success in the past decade due to a wave of grassroots reforms in states across the country. The current legalization movement began in 2012, when Colorado and Washington became the first two states to legalize the use and sale of cannabis for adults aged ≥ 21 years. Since then, the use of cannabis has been legalized in 21 states, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and Washington, DC. Many of these states have explicitly framed the law change as a rejection of the War on Drugs and its harms, felt disproportionately in Black and Brown communities. However, racial inequities in cannabis arrests have increased in states that have legalized cannabis for adult use. Moreover, states working to implement social equity and community reinvestment programs have made little progress toward their goals. This commentary describes how US drug policy, racist in intention, gave way to drug policy that perpetuates racism, even when its ostensible or stated goal is equity. As the United States prepares for national legalization of cannabis, it is critical that we break away from past legislation and mandate equity in cannabis policy. Developing meaningful mandates will require us to acknowledge our history of using drug policy for the racist goals of social control and extortion, study the experience of states that are trying to implement social equity programs, listen to Black leaders and other leaders of color who have developed guidance for equity-focused cannabis policy, and commit to a new paradigm. If we are willing to do these things, we may be able to legalize cannabis in an anti-racist way that will stop causing harm and enable us to effectively implement reparative practices.

Peer Recovery Coaches Perceptions of Their Work and Their Implications for Training, Support and Personal Recovery.

The peer recovery workforce, including individuals in sustained recovery from substance use, has grown rapidly in the previous decades. Peer recovery coaches represent a scalable, resource-efficient, and acceptable approach to increasing service delivery, specifically among individuals receiving substance use services in low-resource communities. Despite the potential to improve access to care in traditionally underserved settings, there are a number of barriers to successfully integrating peer recovery coaches in existing recovery services. The current study presents results from two focus groups composed of peer recovery coaches. Findings suggest that peer recovery coaches report discordance between their perceived role and their daily responsibilities and experience both inter- and intrapersonal challenges that impact their own recovery processes. These results point to several promising policy and structural changes that may support and enhance this growing workforce.

Estimating the effects of legalizing recreational cannabis on newly incident cannabis use.

Liberalized state-level recreational cannabis policies in the United States (US) fostered important policy evaluations with a focus on epidemiological parameters such as proportions [e.g., active cannabis use prevalence; cannabis use disorder (CUD) prevalence]. This cannabis policy evaluation project adds novel evidence on a neglected parameter-namely, estimated occurrence of newly incident cannabis use for underage (<21 years) versus older adults. The project's study populations were specified to yield nationally representative estimates for all 51 major US jurisdictions, with probability sample totals of 819,543 non-institutionalized US civilian residents between 2008 and 2019. Standardized items to measure cannabis onsets are from audio computer-assisted self-interviews. Policy effect estimates are from event study difference-in-difference (DiD) models that allow for causal inference when policy implementation is staggered. The evidence indicates no policy-associated changes in the occurrence of newly incident cannabis onsets for underage persons, but an increased occurrence of newly onset cannabis use among older adults (i.e., >21 years). We offer a tentative conclusion of public health importance: Legalized cannabis retail sales might be followed by the increased occurrence of cannabis onsets for older adults, but not for underage persons who cannot buy cannabis products in a retail outlet. Cannabis policy research does not yet qualify as a mature science. We argue that modeling newly incident cannabis use might be more informative than the modeling of prevalences when evaluating policy effects and provide evidence of the advantages of the event study model over regression methods that seek to adjust for confounding factors.

A multisource database tracking the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the communities of Boston, MA, USA.

A pandemic, like other disasters, changes how systems work. In order to support research on how the COVID-19 pandemic impacted the dynamics of a single metropolitan area and the communities therein, we developed and made publicly available a "data-support system" for the city of Boston. We actively gathered data from multiple administrative (e.g., 911 and 311 dispatches, building permits) and internet sources (e.g., Yelp, Craigslist), capturing aspects of housing and land use, crime and disorder, and commercial activity and institutions. All the data were linked spatially through BARI's Geographical Infrastructure, enabling conjoint analysis. We curated the base records and aggregated them to construct ecometric measures (i.e., descriptors of a place) at various geographic scales, all of which were also published as part of the database. The datasets were published in an open repository, each accompanied by a detailed documentation of methods and variables. We anticipate updating the database annually to maintain the tracking of the records and associated measures.

An NIH investment in health equity - the economic impact of the Flint Center for Health Equity Solutions.

BACKGROUND: Health disparities are pervasive and are linked to economic losses in the United States of up to $135 billion per year. The Flint Center for Health Equity Solutions (FCHES) is a Transdisciplinary Collaborative Center for health disparities research funded by the National Institute of Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD). The purpose of this study was to estimate the economic impact of the 5-year investment in FCHES in Genesee County, Michigan. METHODS: The estimated impacts of FCHES were calculated using a U.S.-specific input/output (I/O) model, IMPLAN, from IMPLAN Group, LLC., which provides a software system to access geographic specific data regarding economic sector interactions from a variety of sources. This allowed us to model the cross-sector economic activity that occurred throughout Genesee County, Michigan, as a result of the FCHES investment. The overall economic impacts were estimated as the sum of three impact types: 1. Direct (the specific expenditures impact of FCHES and the Scientific Research and Development Services sector); 2. Indirect (the impact on suppliers to FCHES and the Scientific Research and Development Services sector); and 3. Induced (the additional economic impact of the spending of these suppliers and employees in the county economy). RESULTS: The total FCHES investment amounted to approximately $11 million between 2016 and 2020. Overall, combined direct, indirect, and induced impacts of the total FCHES federal investment in Genesee County included over 161 job-years, over $7.6 million in personal income, and more than $19.2 million in economic output. In addition, this combined economic activity generated close to $2.3 million in state/local and federal tax revenue. The impact multipliers show the ripple effect of the FCHES investment. For example, the overall output of over $19.2 million led to an impact multiplier of 1.75 - every $1 of federal FCHES investment led to an additional $.75 of economic output in Genesee County. CONCLUSIONS: The FCHES research funding yields significant direct economic impacts above and beyond the direct NIH investment of $11 million. The economic impact estimation method may be relevant and generalizable to other large research centers such as FCHES.

Substance use treatment services utilization and outcomes among probationers in drug courts compared to a matched cohort of probationers in traditional courts.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Drug courts provide an array of substance use treatments and community-based services for probationers struggling with substance use disorders. We assessed substance use treatment services utilization and related expenditures and relapse and recidivism outcomes and identified predictors of cost of provision of substance use treatment services in a matched cohort of Massachusetts probationers in drug courts and traditional courts. METHODS: This was an observational quasi-experimental study with 542 propensity-score-matched probationers initiating drug court between August 1, 2015 and February 28, 2018 and a minimum 6-month follow-up period. RESULTS: A significantly greater proportion of probationers in drug courts were female, self-reported opioids as their primary drug of choice, had a history of substance use treatment, and a high and very high risk of recidivism than their counterparts in traditional courts. We estimated that the provision of substance use treatment services was $1498 more expensive for probationers in drug courts than traditional courts (p = .054). There were no statistically significant differences in relapse or recidivism rates between court systems. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Probationer's age, gender, risk of recidivism at court intake, and enrollment length were strong predictors of expenditures on substance use treatment services. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: This was the first study to assess substance use treatment services utilization and outcomes among probationers in drug courts and traditional courts. Drug courts served the needs of probationers disproportionally impacted by nonserious drug-related offenses struggling with substance use disorders who were at a high and very high risk of recidivism at court intake.

Estimated effect of US state syringe sale policy on source of last-used injection equipment.

BACKGROUND: Many people who inject drugs (PWID) lack access to a new sterile syringe each time they inject, with increased risk of injection-related harms, including spread of communicable diseases. In the United States (US), restricted access is largely due to state laws and policies regulating syringe access. Our aim in this US-focused study is to estimate variations in syringe acquisition behavior in relation to state-level syringe sale policies, drawing upon self-identified PWID in a nationally representative sample survey. METHODS: Estimates were obtained on the source of the last used syringe from participants of the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) years 2002-2011. States were classified as having restricted syringe policies if they had any restriction on the sale of syringes during the study period (e.g., required a prescription or limited the number being sold). RESULTS: In states with unrestricted syringe sale policies, PWID were more likely to have obtained their most recently used syringe from a safe source (Difference (%) = 9.8, 95% CI: 1.9, 17.7). This difference was largely driven by a larger percent of injectors obtaining syringes from a pharmacy in unrestricted states (Difference = 20.4, 95% CI: 12.2, 28.6) but was partially offset by fewer injectors obtaining syringes from syringe exchange programs (Difference = -10.7, 95% CI: -16.1, -5.3). CONCLUSION: These new findings, taken with other evidence, should help promote removal of policy barriers that now thwart syringe acquisition from a safe source. We hope this additional evidence will provoke policy discussions and may influence regulations that promote public health and reduce the spread of communicable diseases.

Evidence-based intervention sustainability strategies: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Sustainability of evidence-based interventions (EBI) remains a challenge for public health community-based institutions. The conceptual definition of sustainment is not universally agreed upon by researchers and practitioners, and strategies utilized to facilitate sustainment of EBI are not consistently reported in published literature. Given these limitations in the field, a systematic review was conducted to summarize the existing evidence supporting discrete sustainment strategies for public health EBIs and facilitating and hindering factors of sustainment. METHODS: We searched PsychINFO, Embase, ProQuest, PubMed, and Google Scholar. The initial search was run in March 2017 and an update was done in March 2019. Study eligibility criteria included (a) public health evidence-based interventions, (b) conducted in the community or community-based settings, and (c) reported outcomes related to EBI sustainment. Details characterizing the study setting, design, target population, and type of EBI sustained were extracted. RESULTS: A total of 26 articles published from 2004 to 2019 were eligible for data extraction. Overall, the importance of sustainability was acknowledged across all of the studies. However, only seven studies presented a conceptual definition of sustainment explicitly within the text. Six of the included studies reported specific sustainment strategies that were used to facilitate the sustainment of EBI. Only three of the studies reported their activities related to sustainment by referencing a sustainment framework. Multiple facilitators (i.e., adaptation/alignment, funding) and barriers (i.e., limited funding, limited resources) were identified as influencing EBI sustainment. The majority (n = 20) of the studies were conducted in high-income countries. Studies from low-income countries were mostly naturalistic. All of the studies from low-income countries reported lack of funding as a hindrance to sustainment. IMPLICATION FOR DISSEMINATION AND IMPLEMENTATION RESEARCH: Literature focused on sustainment of public health EBIs should present an explicit definition of the concept. Better reporting of the framework utilized, steps followed, and adaptations made to sustain the intervention might contribute to standardizing and developing the concept. Moreover, encouraging longitudinal dissemination and implementation (D&I) research especially in low-income countries might help strengthen D&I research capacity in public health settings.

The other side of the broken window: a methodology that translates building permits into an ecometric of investment by community members.

Much research has focused on physical disorder in urban neighborhoods as evidence that the community does not maintain local norms and spaces. Little attention has been paid to the opposite: indicators of proactive investment in the neighborhood's upkeep. This manuscript presents a methodology that translates a database of approved building permits into an ecometric of investment by community members, establishing basic content, criteria for reliability, and construct validity. A database from Boston, MA contained 150,493 permits spanning 2.5 years, each record including the property to be modified, permit type, and date issued. Investment was operationalized as the proportion of properties in a census block group that underwent an addition or renovation, excluding larger developments involving the demolition or construction of a building. The reliability analysis found that robust measures could be generated every 6 months, and that longitudinal analysis could differentiate between trajectories across neighborhoods. The validity analysis supported two hypotheses: investment was best predicted by homeownership and median income; and maintained an independent relationship with measures of physical disorder despite controlling for demographics, implying that it captures the other end of a spectrum of neighborhood maintenance. Possible uses for the measure in research and policy are discussed.