| Title |
Organizational Context and Individual Adaptability in Promoting Perceived Importance and Use of Best Practices for Substance Use
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11414-018-9618-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Danica K. Knight, George W. Joe, David T. Morse, Corey Smith, Hannah Knudsen, Ingrid Johnson, Gail A. Wasserman, Nancy Arrigona, Larkin S. McReynolds, Jennifer E. Becan, Carl Leukefeld, Tisha R. A. Wiley |
| Abstract |
This study examines associations among organizational context, staff attributes, perceived importance, and use of best practices among staff in community-based, juvenile justice (JJ) agencies. As part of the National Institute on Drug Abuse's Juvenile Justice-Translational Research on Interventions for Adolescents in the Legal System (JJ-TRIALS) study, 492 staff from 36 JJ agencies were surveyed about the perceived importance and use of best practices within their organization in five substance use practice domains: screening, assessment, standard referral, active referral, and treatment support. Structural equation models indicated that supervisory encouragement and organizational innovation/flexibility were associated with greater individual adaptability. Adaptability (willingness to try new ideas, use new procedures, adjust quickly to change), was positively correlated with importance ratings. Importance ratings were positively associated with reported use of best practices. Organizational climates that support innovation likely affect use of practices through staff attributes and perceptions of the importance of such services. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 66 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 8% |
| Researcher | 4 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 15% |
| Unknown | 27 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 12 | 18% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 9% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 5% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 12% |
| Unknown | 29 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 19 May 2018.
All research outputs
#6,129,652
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research
#131
of 469 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,368
of 332,684 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research
#4
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 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 469 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
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 332,684 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.