Cited by 47Health Policy Implementation ScienceCommunity Health and DevelopmentPublic Health Policies and Education

Developing and maintaining partnerships as the foundation of implementation and implementation science: Reflections over a half century

Open access
Kellam, Sheppard G.·2012·Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10488-011-0402-8

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • In general, interventions delivered by people from the community of the beneficiaries of the program will be more effective than those delivered by outside agencies that are less connected to program recipients.

    “In general, interventions delivered by people from the community of the beneficiaries of the program will be more effective than those delivered by outside agencies that are less connected to program recipients [22, 23].”

    From Social Network Analysis for Program Implementation (2015) · cites this paper as [23]

  • Mapping community constituents' mutual self-interests and relationships is a critical first stage before a community undertakes implementation of an evidence-based program.

    “Indeed, this mapping has also been described by Kellam [23] as a critical first stage before a community undertakes the implementation of an evidence-based program.”

    From Social Network Analysis for Program Implementation (2015) · cites this paper as [23]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kellam, S. G.
Affiliations
Johns Hopkins University (US)
Corresponding author
Kellam, Sheppard G.
Venue
Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research
Published
2012-01-13
Volume
39
Issue
4
Pages
317-320
ISSN
  • 0894-587X (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-3289
OpenAlex
W2113947143
Cited by
47
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 14 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
FWCI
4.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Drug Abuse (P30DA027828)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Community Health and Development
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Public Health Policies and Education
Keywords
public health partnerships, implementation science, program implementation, community support, public health law, community organizations, research institutions, priority setting, scale-up, history of public health
MeSH terms
Child, Child Behavior, Child, Preschool, Cooperative Behavior, Humans, Mental Health Services, Public Health, Schools, United States, Program Evaluation, History, 20th Century, History, 21st Century, Public-Private Sector Partnerships

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