↓ Skip to main content

An evidence-based co-occurring disorder intervention in VA homeless programs: outcomes from a hybrid III trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
120 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.
Title
An evidence-based co-occurring disorder intervention in VA homeless programs: outcomes from a hybrid III trial
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12913-018-3123-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

David A. Smelson, Matthew Chinman, Gordon Hannah, Thomas Byrne, Sharon McCarthy

Abstract

Evidence-based treatment for co-occurring disorders is needed within programs that serve homeless Veterans to assist with increasing engagement in care and to prevent future housing loss. A specialized co-occurring disorders treatment engagement intervention called Maintaining Independence and Sobriety Through Systems Integration, Outreach and Networking - Veterans Edition (MISSION-Vet) was implemented within the Housing and Urban Development - Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD-VASH) Programs with and without an implementation strategy called Getting To Outcomes (GTO). While implementation was modest for the GTO group, no one adopted MISSION in the non-GTO group. This paper reports Veteran level outcome data on treatment engagement and select behavioral health outcomes for Veterans exposed to the MISSION-Vet model compared to Veterans without access to MISSION-Vet. This hybrid Type III trial compared 81 Veterans in the GTO group to a similar group of 87 Veterans with mental health and substance use disorders from the caseload of staff in the non-GTO group. Comparisons were made on treatment engagement, negative housing exits, drug and alcohol abuse, inpatient hospitalizations, emergency department visits and income level over time, using mixed-effect or Cox regression models. Treatment engagement, as measured by the overall number of case manager contacts with Veterans and others (e.g. family members, health providers), was significantly higher among Veterans in the GTO group (B = 2.30, p = .04). Supplemental exploratory analyses between Veterans who received "higher" and "lower" intensity MISSION-Vet services in the GTO group failed to show differences in alcohol and drug use, inpatient hospitalization and emergency department use. Despite modest MISSION-Vet fidelity among staff treating Veterans in the GTO group, differences were found in treatment engagement. However, this study failed to show differences in alcohol use, drug use, mental health hospitalizations and negative housing exits over time among those Veterans receiving higher intensity MISSION-Vet services versus low intensity services. This project suggests that MISSION-Vet could be used in HUD-VASH to increase engagement among Veterans struggling with homelessness, a group often disconnected from care. Clinicaltrials.gov, registration number: NCT01430741 , registered July 26, 2011.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 120 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 14%
Student > Master 15 13%
Student > Bachelor 14 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 15 13%
Unknown 43 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 19 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 15%
Social Sciences 12 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 3%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 49 41%
Attention Score in Context

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 24 December 2019.
All research outputs
#5,702,574
of 23,047,237 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,490
of 7,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,543
of 327,168 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#89
of 220 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,047,237 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,721 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 327,168 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 220 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.