CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 224Psychiatric care and mental health servicesHomelessness and Social IssuesSchizophrenia research and treatment

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Psychiatric Hospitalizations, Arrests, Emergency Room Visits, and Homelessness of Clients with Serious and Persistent Mental Illness: Findings from a Randomized Trial of Two ACT Programs vs. Usual Care

Clarke, Gregory N., Herinckx, Heidi A., Kinney, Ronald F., Paulson, Robert I., Cutler, David L., Lewis, Karen, Oxman, Evie·2000·Mental Health Services Research
DOI 10.1023/a:1010141826867
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objective This investigation examined several adverse outcomes in clients with serious mental illness in a randomized trial of Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) versus usual care. Method 163 subjects were randomized to one of two ACT experimental conditions (staffed by consumers or non-consumers) or usual community care. Conditions were compared on psychiatric hospitalization, emergency room visit, arrest, and homelessness, within the two-year study period. Demographic, program, and client variables were examined for significant associations with outcomes. Results Significant differences were found between ACT and usual care in time to first arrest, but not hospitalization, homelessness or ER visits. Shorter time to first hospitalization was associated with male gender, diagnoses other than schizophrenia, high psychiatric symptomatology and lower provider case load. ER visits were associated with increased client symptomatology. Shorter times to homelessness were predicted by poorer therapeutic alliance between case manager and clients. Shorter time to first arrest was predicted by client minority status and enrollment in usual care. Conclusions The paucity of significant main effects may have been due to a prolonged "start-up" phase of the ACT programs, poor ACT implementation, restricted availability of psychiatric hospital beds, or changes in usual care services delivered over the study period.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1023/a:1010141826867

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

  • Assertive community treatment could help reduce the risk for arrest among homeless people.

    “Interventions such as assertive community treatment (ACT) seek to prevent homelessness among individuals with mental illness and to address behavioral disorders (mainly substance use disorders, psychotic disorders, and depressive disorders [62]) and could help reduce the risk for arrest among homeless people (63).”

    From Referral of patients to psychiatric emergency departments by police: A systematic review and meta-analysis (2025) · cites this paper as [63]

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Drake, R. E., Mueser, K. T., & McHugo, G. J. (1996). Clinician rating scales: Alcohol Use Scale (AUS), Drug Use Scale (DUS), and Substance Abuse Treatment Scale (SATS). In L. I. Sederer, & B. Dickey (Eds.), Outcomes assessment in clinical practice (pp. 113-116). Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins.
  2. Lukoff, D., Nuechterlein, K. H., & Ventura J. (1986). Manual for the Expanded Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 12, 594-602.
  3. Nikkel, R. E., Smith, G., & Edwards, D. (1992). A consumeroriented case management project. Hospital and Community Psychiatry, 43, 577-579.
  4. Paulson, R., Clarke, G. N., Herinckx, H., Kinney, R., Cutler, D., & Lewis, K. (2000). A Randomized trial of consumer vs. Non-consumer-staffed assertive community treatment programs vs. Usual care for persons with major mental illness: Two year outcomes. Unpublished manuscript, Regional Research Institute, Portland State University, Oregon.
  5. Ventura, J., Green, M., & Shaner, A. (1993). Training and quality assurance on the BPRS: 'The drift busters.' International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 3, 221-224.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Clarke, G. N., Herinckx, H. A., Kinney, R. F., Paulson, R. I., Cutler, D. L., Lewis, K., & Oxman, E.
Affiliations
  • Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research (US)
  • Portland State University (US)
Corresponding author
Clarke, Gregory N.
ORCID
Clarke, Gregory N.
Venue
Mental Health Services Research
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2000-09
Volume
2
Issue
3
Pages
155-164
ISSN
  • 1522-3434 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-6636
DOI
10.1023/a:1010141826867
OpenAlex
W1570195765
Semantic Scholar
ec1aa7389078636f94d7d1e57964430f228d2043
Cited by
223
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 52 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 12
FWCI
2.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Mental Health Services Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Homelessness and Social Issues
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
Keywords
assertive community treatment, severe mental illness, psychiatric hospitalization, emergency department visits, arrests, homelessness, therapeutic relationship, psychiatric symptom severity, minority status
MeSH terms
Adult, Mental Disorders, Community Mental Health Services, Emergency Services, Psychiatric, Female, Ill-Housed Persons, Hospitalization, Humans, Male, Severity of Illness Index, United States, Program Evaluation, Treatment Outcome

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