↓ Skip to main content

A multi-site, randomized study of strengths-based case management with substance-abusing parolees

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Experimental Criminology, April 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
Title
A multi-site, randomized study of strengths-based case management with substance-abusing parolees
Published in
Journal of Experimental Criminology, April 2011
DOI 10.1007/s11292-011-9123-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael Prendergast, Linda Frisman, JoAnn Y. Sacks, Michele Staton-Tindall, Lisa Greenwell, Hsiu-Ju Lin, Jerry Cartier

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To test whether strengths-based case management provided during an inmate's transition from incarceration to the community increases participation in community substance abuse treatment, enhances access to needed social services, and improves drug use, crime, and HIV risk outcomes. METHODS: In a multi-site trial, inmates (men and women) in four states (n = 812) were randomly assigned (within site) to receive either Transitional Case Management (TCM group), based on strengths-based principles, or standard parole services (SR group). Data were collected at baseline and at 3 and 9 months following release from prison. Analyses compared the two groups with respect to services received and to drug use, crime, and HIV risk behavior outcomes. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between parolees in the TCM group and the SR group on outcomes related to participation in drug abuse treatment, receipt of social services, or drug use, crime, and HIV risk behaviors. For specific services (e.g., residential treatment, mental health), although significant differences were found for length of participation or for number of visits, the number of participants in these services was small and the direction of effect was not consistent. CONCLUSION: In contrast to positive findings in earlier studies of strengths-based case management with mental-health and drug-abuse clients, this study found that case management did not improve treatment participation or behavioral outcomes for parolees with drug problems. The discussion includes possible reasons for the findings and suggestions for modifications to the intervention that could be addressed in future research.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 75 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 18%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Student > Master 4 5%
Other 16 21%
Unknown 12 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 19 25%
Social Sciences 18 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 1%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 14 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 August 2017.
All research outputs
#6,000,719
of 22,651,245 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Experimental Criminology
#224
of 412 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,428
of 109,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Experimental Criminology
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,651,245 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 412 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.2. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 109,052 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them