Cited by 191Health Policy Implementation ScienceCommunity Health and DevelopmentSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes

Community Coalitions as a System: Effects of Network Change on Adoption of Evidence-Based Substance Abuse Prevention

Open access
Valente, Thomas W., Chou, Chich Ping, Pentz, Mary Ann·2007·American Journal of Public Health

Abstract

Objectives. We examined the effect of community coalition network structure on the effectiveness of an intervention designed to accelerate the adoption of evidence-based substance abuse prevention programs. Methods. At baseline, 24 cities were matched and randomly assigned to 3 conditions (control, satellite TV training, and training plus technical assistance). We surveyed 415 community leaders at baseline and 406 at 18-month follow-up about their attitudes and practices toward substance abuse prevention programs. Network structure was measured by asking leaders whom in their coalition they turned to for advice about prevention programs. The outcome was a scale with 4 subscales: coalition function, planning, achievement of benchmarks, and progress in prevention activities. We used multiple linear regression and path analysis to test hypotheses. Results. Intervention had a significant effect on decreasing the density of coalition networks. The change in density subsequently increased adoption of evidence-based practices. Conclusions. Optimal community network structures for the adoption of public health programs are unknown, but it should not be assumed that increasing network density or centralization are appropriate goals. Lower-density networks may be more efficient for organizing evidence-based prevention programs in communities.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2105/ajph.2005.063644

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • In one intervention, increased density was found to inhibit adoption of evidence-based programs.

    “And in one intervention, increased density was found to inhibit adoption of evidence-based programs [50].”

    From Social Network Analysis for Program Implementation (2015) · cites this paper as [50]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Valente, T. W., Chou, C. P., & Pentz, M. A.
Affiliations
University of Southern California (US)
Venue
American Journal of Public Health
Published
2007-05
Volume
97
Issue
5
Pages
880-886
ISSN
  • 0090-0036 (ISSN-L)
  • 1541-0048
OpenAlex
W2164882174
Cited by
191
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 12
FWCI
31.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Public Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Southern California
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (P50DA016094, R01DA012524)
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 › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Keywords
community coalitions, network structure, network density, network centralization, evidence-based prevention programs, substance use prevention, program adoption, technical assistance, community leaders, public health program implementation
MeSH terms
Health Care Coalitions, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Community Networks, Evidence-Based Medicine, Substance-Related Disorders, Guideline Adherence, Benchmarking

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