↓ Skip to main content

Adapting Washington Circle performance measures for public sector substance abuse treatment systems

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, August 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source

Readers on

mendeley
107 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Adapting Washington Circle performance measures for public sector substance abuse treatment systems
Published in
Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, August 2008
DOI 10.1016/j.jsat.2008.06.008
Pubmed ID
Authors

Deborah W. Garnick, Margaret T. Lee, Constance M. Horgan, Andrea Acevedo, Washington Circle Public Sector Workgroup

Abstract

The Washington Circle, a group focused on developing and disseminating performance measures for substance abuse services, developed three such measures for private health plans. In this article, we explore whether these measures are appropriate for meeting measurement goals in the public sector and feasible to calculate in the public sector using data collected for administrative purposes by state and local substance abuse and/or mental health agencies. Working collaboratively, 12 states specified revised measures and 6 states pilot tested them. Two measures were retained from the original specifications: initiation of treatment and treatment engagement. Additional measures were focused on continuity of care after assessment, detoxification, residential or inpatient care. These data demonstrate that state agencies can calculate performance measures from routinely available information and that there is wide variability in these indicators. Ongoing research is needed to examine the reasons for these results, which might include lack of patient interest or commitment, need for quality improvement efforts, or financial issues.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 3 3%
Unknown 104 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 23 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 9%
Student > Master 9 8%
Lecturer 6 6%
Other 25 23%
Unknown 22 21%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 17 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 16%
Psychology 14 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 9 8%
Engineering 7 7%
Other 14 13%
Unknown 29 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 23 August 2013.
All research outputs
#5,591,411
of 32,332,113 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment
#647
of 2,514 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,500
of 124,197 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment
#10
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,332,113 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,514 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 124,197 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.