Cited by 136Health Policy Implementation ScienceHealth Sciences Research and EducationPsychiatric care and mental health services

Implementation of Evidence-Based Practice in Community Behavioral Health: Agency Director Perspectives

Proctor, Enola K., Knudsen, Kraig J., Fedoravicius, Nicole, Hovmand, Peter, Rosen, Aaron, Perron, Brian·2007·Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research

Abstract

Despite a growing supply of evidence-based mental health treatments, we have little evidence about how to implement them in real-world care. This qualitative pilot study captured the perspectives of agency directors on the challenge of implementing evidence-based practices in community mental health agencies. Directors identified challenges as limited access to research, provider resistance, and training costs. Director leadership, support to providers, and partnerships with universities were leverage points to implement evidenced-based treatments. Directors' mental models of EBP invoked such concepts as agency reputation, financial solvency, and market niche. Findings have potential to shape implementation interventions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10488-007-0129-8

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Legal, reimbursement, and regulatory factors affect the adoption and sustainability of evidence-based treatments.

    “Health policies differ in many ways that impact quality [117], and legal, reimbursement, and regulatory factors affect the adoption and sustainability of evidence-based treatments [118].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Proctor, E. K., Knudsen, K. J., Fedoravicius, N., Hovmand, P., Rosen, A., & Perron, B.
Affiliations
Washington University in St. Louis (US)
Corresponding author
Proctor, Enola K.
Venue
Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research
Published
2007-07-18
Volume
34
Issue
5
Pages
479-488
ISSN
  • 0894-587X (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-3289
OpenAlex
W2000766070
Cited by
136
References
55
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 12
FWCI
17.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5p30mh068579-05)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (5 P30 MH068579, T32MH019960)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Sciences Research and Education
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
Keywords
evidence-based practice, implementation, community mental health centers, agency directors, mental health service delivery, research accessibility, training costs, university partnerships, mental models, implementation strategies
MeSH terms
Mental Disorders, Community Mental Health Services, Diffusion of Innovation, Health Facility Administrators, Humans, Interviews as Topic, United States, Evidence-Based Medicine

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review