IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v48y2015icp92-99.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An overview of evidence-based program registers (EBPRs) for behavioral health

Author

Listed:
  • Burkhardt, Jason T.
  • Schröter, Daniela C.
  • Magura, Stephen
  • Means, Stephanie N.
  • Coryn, Chris L.S.

Abstract

Evaluations of behavioral health interventions have identified many that are potentially effective. However, clinicians and other decision makers typically lack the time and ability to effectively search and synthesize the relevant research literature. In response to this opportunity, and to increasing policy and funding pressures for the use of evidence-based practices, a number of “what works” websites have emerged to assist decision makers in selecting interventions with the highest probability of benefit. However, these registers as a whole are not well understood. This article, which represents phase one of a concurrent mixed methods study, presents a review of the scopes, structures, dissemination strategies, uses, and challenges faced by evidence-based registers in the behavioral health disciplines. The major findings of this study show that in general, registers of evidence-based practices are able, to a degree, to identify the most effective practices meet this need to a degree. However, much needs to be done to improve the ability of the registers to fully realize their purpose.

Suggested Citation

  • Burkhardt, Jason T. & Schröter, Daniela C. & Magura, Stephen & Means, Stephanie N. & Coryn, Chris L.S., 2015. "An overview of evidence-based program registers (EBPRs) for behavioral health," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 92-99.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:48:y:2015:i:c:p:92-99
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2014.09.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718914001104
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2014.09.006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rieckmann, Traci R. & Kovas, Anne E. & Cassidy, Elaine F. & McCarty, Dennis, 2011. "Employing policy and purchasing levers to increase the use of evidence-based practices in community-based substance abuse treatment settings: Reports from single state authorities," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 366-374, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. T’Pring R. Westbrook & Sarah A. Avellar & Neil Seftor, 2017. "Reviewing the Reviews: Examining Similarities and Differences Between Federally Funded Evidence Reviews," Evaluation Review, , vol. 41(3), pages 183-211, June.
    2. Maranda, Michael J. & Magura, Stephen & Gugerty, Ryan & Lee, Miranda J. & Landsverk, John A. & Rolls-Reutz, Jennifer & Green, Brandn, 2021. "State behavioral health agency website references to evidence-based program registers," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    3. Oliver, Jason A. & Lang, Jason M., 2018. "Barriers and consultation needs regarding implementation of evidence-based treatment in community agencies," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 368-377.
    4. Magura, Stephen & Lee-Easton, Miranda J. & Abu-Obaid, Ruqayyah N. & Landsverk, John & DeCamp, Whitney & Rolls-Reutz, Jennifer & Moore, Kristin & Firpo-Triplett, Regina & Buckley, Pamela R. & Stout, El, 2023. "The influence of evidence-based program registry websites for dissemination of evidence-based interventions in behavioral healthcare," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    5. Iudici, Antonio & Gagliardo Corsi, Agnese, 2017. "Evaluation in the field of social services for minors: Measuring the efficacy of interventions in the Italian service for health protection and promotion," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 160-168.
    6. Pamela R. Buckley & Abigail A. Fagan & Fred C. Pampel & Karl G. Hill, 2020. "Making Evidence-Based Interventions Relevant for Users: A Comparison of Requirements for Dissemination Readiness Across Program Registries," Evaluation Review, , vol. 44(1), pages 51-83, February.
    7. Carr, E. Summerson & Obertino-Norwood, Hannah, 2022. "Legitimizing evidence: The trans-institutional life of evidence-based practice," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 310(C).
    8. Axford, Nick & Morpeth, Louise & Bjornstad, Gretchen & Hobbs, Tim & Berry, Vashti, 2022. "“What works” registries of interventions to improve child and youth psychosocial outcomes: A critical appraisal," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    9. Bujold, M. & El Sherif, R. & Bush, P.L. & Johnson-Lafleur, J. & Doray, G. & Pluye, P., 2018. "Ecological content validation of the Information Assessment Method for parents (IAM-parent): A mixed methods study," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 79-88.
    10. Zack, Melissa K. & Karre, Jennifer K. & Olson, Jonathan & Perkins, Daniel F., 2019. "Similarities and differences in program registers: A case study," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 1-1.
    11. Thomas E. Strayer & Laura E. Balis & NithyaPriya S. Ramalingam & Samantha M. Harden, 2022. "Dissemination in Extension: Health Specialists’ Information Sources and Channels for Health Promotion Programming," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-13, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Means, Stephanie N. & Magura, Stephen & Burkhardt, Jason T. & Schröter, Daniela C. & Coryn, Chris L.S., 2015. "Comparing rating paradigms for evidence-based program registers in behavioral health: Evidentiary criteria and implications for assessing programs," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 100-116.
    2. Maranda, Michael J. & Magura, Stephen & Gugerty, Ryan & Lee, Miranda J. & Landsverk, John A. & Rolls-Reutz, Jennifer & Green, Brandn, 2021. "State behavioral health agency website references to evidence-based program registers," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:48:y:2015:i:c:p:92-99. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.