Bridging Community Intervention and Mental Health Services Research
Abstract
Objective This article explores the potential of community intervention perspectives for increasing the relevance, reach, and public health impact of mental health services research. Method The authors reviewed community intervention strategies, including public health and community development and empowerment interventions, and contrast community intervention with practice-based quality improvement and policy research. Results A model was proposed to integrate health services and community intervention research, building on the evidence-based strength of quality improvement and participatory methods of community intervention to produce complementary functions, such as linking community-based case finding and referral with practice-based quality improvement, enhanced by community-based social support for treatment adherence. Conclusions The community intervention approach is a major paradigm for affecting public health or addressing health disparities. Despite challenges in implementation and evaluation, it represents a promising approach for extending the reach of mental health services interventions into diverse communities.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The impetus to blend or explicitly link research traditions in the service of accelerating scientific progress and enhancing public health impact is not at all new, and the idea of blending clinical effectiveness and implementation research elements is also not new.
“The impetus to blend or explicitly link research traditions in the service of accelerating scientific progress and enhancing public health impact is not at all new,4,38–40 and the idea of blending clinical effectiveness and implementation research elements is also not new.”
From Effectiveness-implementation Hybrid Designs: Combining Elements of Clinical Effectiveness and Implementation Research to Enhance Public Health Impact (2012) · cites this paper as [39]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 88 · Cited by 237
- Authors
- Wells, K., Miranda, J., Bruce, M. L., Alegria, M., & Wallerstein, N.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Los Angeles (US)
- Venue
- American Journal of Psychiatry
- Published
- 2004-06-01
- Volume
- 161
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 955-963
- ISSN
- 0002-953X (ISSN-L)
- 1535-7228
- OpenAlex
- W2152990771
- Cited by
- 237
- References
- 88
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 41 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 18
- FWCI
- 1.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- American Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Mental Health (MH-64608, P01MH059876, MH54623, R24MH064608, P50MH054623, MH-01634, K02MH001634, MH-59876)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Community Health and Development
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mental Health and Patient Involvement
- Keywords
- community-based intervention, mental health services research, community development, empowerment interventions, public health impact, community-based case finding, referral, social support, medication adherence, health disparities, participatory research
- MeSH terms
- Mental Disorders, Community Mental Health Services, Community Participation, Health Policy, Health Promotion, Health Services Accessibility, Health Services Research, Humans, Models, Theoretical, Public Health, Quality of Health Care, Program Evaluation, Public Health Practice, Community Health Planning
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