|
A Preliminary Study of Population-Adjusted Effectiveness of Substance Abuse Prevention Programming: Towards Making Institute of Medicine Program Types Comparable
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Steve Shamblen,
Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation,
sshamblen@pire.org
|
| James Derzon,
Battelle,
derzonj@battelle.org
|
| Abstract:
The present study employs a public health perspective to comparisons of substance abuse prevention programs. This perspective (the IOM) distinguishes between programs based on who is targeted: the population (universal), those at risk (selective), or persons exhibiting early stages or problem behavior (indicated). Prior comparisons have found effectiveness and positive cost-benefits accrue to selective and indicated programs, but these studies have failed to make these program types comparable by examining the impact of these programs on the larger population. Such an approximation that makes these programs comparable is offered. A meta-analysis was performed on 43 studies (25 programs) to demonstrate this approach and to examine program comparability. The average adjusted effect sizes for selective and indicated programs were reduced by approximately half. Benefits accrued to universal programs for reducing tobacco and marijuana use (low base rates of frequent use) and to selective/indicated programs for reducing alcohol use.
|
|
A Participatory Approach to Developing Quality of Care Indicators for the Evaluation of Children’s Mental Health Services
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Amy Vargo,
University of South Florida,
avargo@fmhi.usf.edu
|
| Patty Sharrock,
University of South Florida,
psharrock@fmhi.usf.edu
|
| Abstract:
The evolution of a methodological approach and most salient findings are presented from a mixed-method three-year study funded by Florida’s Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA). The evaluation focused on the quality of Medicaid-funded mental health services provided to children with or at risk of serious emotional disturbance in Florida. Participants will learn how caregiver and provider input regarding the importance of quality of care indicators and their measurement was meaningfully incorporated into study methodology. A Quality of Care Framework will be discussed, which includes domains of access to services, appropriateness of services, consumer engagement in services and service planning, and outcomes. This framework emerged from the first year’s study and was utilized to evaluate the quality of care in the two subsequent years. Data collection methods consisted of semi-structured interviews with caregivers and service providers during the first two years and a mail survey during year three.
|
|
The Psychometric Properties of the Simple Screening Instrument for Substance Abuse
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Roger Boothroyd,
University of South Florida,
boothroy@fmhi.usf.edu
|
| Mary Armstrong,
University of South Florida,
armstron@fmhi.usf.edu
|
| Abstract:
The Simple Screening Instrument for Substance Abuse (SSI-SA) was developed by a consensus panel (Winters, Zenilman, et al., 1994). It is a self-report screening measure containing 16 yes/no items. Because only 14 items are used when scoring, scores range from 0 to 14. A score of 4 or more has been established as the cut-off point warranting further more comprehensive assessment. Although several studies have examined the SSI-SA’s use and psychometric properties, (e.g., Peters, 2000; Peters, et al., 2004), these studies have primarily focused on correctional populations. This paper will summarize the SSI-SA’s psychometric properties using data obtained from approximately 10,000 Medicaid-enrolled adults who participated in various studies conducted over the past 10 years. The SSI-SA’s factor structure, estimates of internal consistency and test-retest reliability and evidence assessing the measures’ discriminant and convergent validity will be presented.
|
|
Evaluation of Measurement Invariance of the Global Appraisal of Individual Needs Scales among Diverse Groups of Youth with Substance Use Disorders
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Mesfin S Mulatu,
MayaTech Corporation,
mmulatu@mayatech.com
|
| Kimberly Jeffries Leonard,
MayaTech Corporation,
kjleonard@mayatech.com
|
| Dionne C Godette,
University of Georgia,
dgodette@uga.edu
|
| Darren Fulmore,
MayaTech Corporation,
dfulmore@mayatech.com
|
| Abstract:
The Global Appraisal of Individual Needs (GAIN) is a standardized biopsychosocial tool widely used in substance abuse treatment (SAT) settings for diagnostic assessment and outcome evaluation. Although its reliability, factorial structure, and validity have been supported by earlier studies, the degree to which its measurement properties are equivalent across racial/ethnic groups has not been adequately studied. We examined measurement invariance of GAIN’s General Individual Severity Scale among 8499 youth entering SAT (21% Black, 23% Hispanic and 56% White), using multi-group confirmatory factor analyses. Results provided evidence for configural and metric invariance of the scale among the three groups (CFI >.95; RMSEA and SRMR <.06). Evidence for scalar and strict factorial invariance was modest (CFI =.94; RMSEA =.06–.07; SRMR =.08–.09). It is concluded that GAIN’s factor structure and the meaning of factor scores are similar across groups. Efforts at reducing group-specific systematic biases may further improve GAIN’s measurement properties.
|
| | | |