Systematic Review of EBPs for SMI in Rural America

Weaver, Addie; Capobianco, Jeff; Ruffolo, Mary

doi:10.1080/15433714.2013.765815

Cited by 11 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…1. continued consumer and family involvement in program, policy, and clinical decision making and outcomes (MacDonald- Wilson, Schuster, & Wasilchak, 2015;Nelson, Barr, & Castaldo, 2015); 2. integration models that address patient centeredness and normative aspects of care across functional, organizational, professional and service components within integrated primary care/mental health programs (Bachrach, Boozang, & Davis, 2017;Bird, Lambert, Hartley, Beeson, & Coburn, 1998;van der Klauw, Molema, Grooten, & Vrijhoef, 2014), and, 3. clinical, service provision, cultural, and management competence (or rural practice expertise) of rural behavioral health providers, especially in the adoption and implementation of evidence-based practices (Dotson et al, 2014;Weaver, Capobianco, & Ruffolo, 2015).…”

Section: Implications For Behavioral Healthmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rural Behavioral Health Services

Levin

Hanson

2019

Foundations of Behavioral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Implications For Behavioral Healthmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rural Behavioral Health Services

Levin

Hanson

2019

Foundations of Behavioral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For social work, GL matters because one way through which social workers operationalize the professional values of integrity, competence, and social justice (NASW, 2017) is through practice-based research. GL contains interventions and evaluations published by social work practitioners (Liedgren et al, 2016;Weaver, Capobianco, & Ruffolo, 2015). For example, social workers routinely generate case-specific knowledge to manage the gaps in (empirical) evidence they need to effectively respond to their clients' unique experiences of oppression, contextual risks, and protective factors (Hurley & Taiwo, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bridging the Grey Gap: Conducting Grey Literature Reviews for Ethical Social Work Practice and Research

Christensen

Todić

McMahon

2022

Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article provides a social work approach to reviewing the grey literature as part of a scoping or systematic review, one that incorporates attention to all layers of the social ecology through a person-in-the environment (PIE) framework. Little guidance exists on how to conduct a grey literature review specific to social work. Yet, consulting the grey literature, which often includes knowledge generated by practitioners and community members outside of academia, aligns with social work's commitment to social justice, integrity, and competence, because the grey literature contains case-specific and contemporary information about social work practice.While academic knowledge about ways to address injustices has value, it is often constrained by the broader influences of the neoliberal political economy, which emphasizes depoliticized market-based solutions to social issues and (re)produces inequities. Consequently, sole reliance on academic evidence compromises social workers' ability to fulfill their ethical commitment to integrity, competence, and social justice. We use a scoping review focused on the use of restorative and transformative justice as responses to sexual violence as a case study that demonstrates value of grey literature in social work. Our aim is to 1) demonstrate that grey literature should be an essential part of evidence-informed ethical social work practice; 2) recommend a social work approach to reviewing the grey literature that incorporates the person in the environment framework.

show abstract

“…Long travel distances can create transport challenges [2,8,37] and make it more di cult to handle crises [38] and perform outreach work [13,15,[39][40][41]. This can be further complicated by challenging driving conditions [11,15] because heavy snowfall is common in Norway.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sparsely populated areas can lead to fewer [1,4,37,42] and less specialized services [37], poorer access to professionals [2,4,6,16,37,[42][43][44][45][46][47] and specialist expertise [4,12] as well as high staff turnover [44,46]. Multidisciplinary teams can operate in rural areas [9,48], but care and treatment models are often developed for urban contexts [9,41,42]. In some cases, considerable modi cations are made to such models in rural contexts [14,39,41,42,49,50].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Flexible assertive community treatment in rural contexts: a qualitative study on the challenges and adaptions of the model

Trane

Aasbrenn

Rønningen

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Flexible assertive community treatment (FACT) is an innovative model for providing long-term treatment to people with severe mental illness. This model was developed in the Netherlands but is now used in other countries, including Norway, which has a complex and fragmented service system and geography different from the Netherlands, with many rural areas. Implementation of innovations is context-dependent. The FACT model’s potential in rural areas, such as those in Norway, has not been studied. Therefore, we aimed to gain knowledge regarding the challenges and modifications of the model in rural contexts and discuss how they can affect the model’s potential in such areas. This knowledge can improve the understanding of how FACT teams or similar services can be adapted to function most optimally in rural conditions. We sought to address the following questions: Which elements of the FACT model do team leaders of the rural FACT teams find particularly challenging due to the context, and what modifications have the teams made to the model? Methods: Digital interviews were conducted with five team leaders from five rural FACT teams in different parts of Norway. They were selected using purposive sampling to include team leaders from some of the most rural teams in Norway. The interviews were analysed using thematic text analysis.Results: The following three themes described the elements of the FACT model that were experienced as particularly challenging in the rural context: multidisciplinary shared caseload approach, intensive outreach and crisis management. The following eight themes described the modifications that the teams had made to the model: intermunicipal collaboration, context-adaptive planning, delegation of tasks to municipal services, part-time employment, different geographical locations of staff, use of digital tools, fewer FACT board meetings and reduced caseload.Conclusions: Rural contexts appear to challenge the FACT model’s potential. However, modifications can be made, some of which can be considered innovative modifications that can increase the model’s potential in rural areas, while others might move the teams further away from the model. There appears to be a limit to the length of travel distances and sparsity of population for the FACT model to function.

show abstract

Systematic Review of EBPs for SMI in Rural America

Cited by 11 publications

References 42 publications

Rural Behavioral Health Services

Rural Behavioral Health Services

Bridging the Grey Gap: Conducting Grey Literature Reviews for Ethical Social Work Practice and Research

Flexible assertive community treatment in rural contexts: a qualitative study on the challenges and adaptions of the model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About