Cited by 50Opioid Use Disorder TreatmentIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes

Statewide Collaborative Partnerships among American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) Communities in California to Target the Opioid Epidemic: Preliminary Results of the Tribal Medication Assisted Treatment (MAT) Key Informant Needs Assessment

Zeledon, Ingrid, West, Amy, Antony, Valentine, Telles, Victoria, Begay, Cynthia, Henderson, Bryce, Unger, Jennifer B., Soto, Claradina·2020·Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment

Abstract

American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) communities have disproportionately been impacted by the opioid epidemic with the second highest opioid-related overdose death rates compared to other ethnic groups. The diversity among California AI/AN tribes, including regional differences in economic opportunities, tribal affiliation and organization, resources and infrastructure, requires a strong community-based partnership approach to assess global statewide patterns in service availability, acceptability, and utilization, as well as capturing the unique challenges and service needs within each region. This article describes a statewide community-based needs assessment of strengths and weakness among key informants in CA to identify facilitators and barriers to treatment of substance use disorders (SUD) and opioid use disorders (OUD). We conducted structured interviews of 21 healthcare professionals from Urban Indian Health Programs, Tribal clinics and community-based organizations throughout California. The interview assessed (1) barriers to accessing services; (2) risk factors; (3) protective factors; (4) community substance use description; (5) SUD and OUD services available; and (6) service system needs. Findings indicate an overall increase in SUD and OUD in AI/AN communities. Key informants discussed the importance of comprehensive and culturally centered care, wrap-around services, such as treatment of mental health issues alongside substance abuse, and the need for AI/AN…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jsat.2019.04.003

Cites

41 of 41 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 43 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zeledon, I., West, A., Antony, V., Telles, V., Begay, C., Henderson, B., Unger, J. B., & Soto, C.
Affiliations
  • University of Southern California (US)
  • Claremont Graduate University (US)
Corresponding author
Soto, Claradina
Venue
Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-01
Volume
108
Pages
9-19
ISSN
0740-5472 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2939389333
Cited by
50
References
43
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 1
FWCI
4.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Department of Health Care Services (17-94722)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
  • Social Sciences › Health › Indigenous Health, Education, and Rights
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Keywords
opioid epidemic, American Indian and Alaska Native communities, opioid use disorder, substance use disorders, barriers to treatment access, wraparound services, mental health integration, California tribes
MeSH terms
Opioid Epidemic, California, Cooperative Behavior, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Opioid-Related Disorders, Needs Assessment, American Indian or Alaska Native, Culturally Competent Care

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