MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809616120 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0199368

Evidence for the effectiveness of police-based pre-booking diversion programs in decriminalizing mental illness: A systematic literature review

2018· review· en· W2809616120 on OpenAlexaff
Carolyn S. Dewa, Desmond Loong, Austin Trujillo, Sarah Bonato

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCriminalizationMental illnessCriminal justiceMedicinePopulationMental healthPsychiatrySystematic reviewIntervention (counseling)Psychological interventionCrisis interventionPsychologyMEDLINECriminologyEnvironmental healthPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: People with mental illnesses are at a significantly greater risk of police arrest than the general population. This pattern of arrests has been associated with a phenomenon referred to as the criminalization of mental illness such that people with mental illnesses are inappropriately diverted to the criminal justice system rather than to treatment. To decrease arrests of people with mental illnesses experiencing a crisis, pre-booking diversion programs have been developed to intervene at the point of police contact. This systematic literature review examines the state of knowledge regarding the effectiveness of police-based pre-booking diversion programs by addressing the question, "What is the evidence for the effectiveness of police-based pre-booking diversion programs in reducing arrests (i.e., reducing criminalization) of people with mental illnesses?" METHODS: Systematic literature searches of seven databases were performed during May 2017. The searches sought to identify studies that examined the effectiveness of pre-booking diversion programs in decreasing arrests. A multi-phase screening process was completed independently by two pairs of reviewers as well as a risk of bias review. RESULTS: A total of 2,750 unique citations were identified. Of these, 4 met the inclusion/exclusion criteria; all were from the US. Three of the studies examined the effectiveness of Crisis Intervention Teams and one study looked at a mobile crisis program. Two of the studies were at moderate risk of bias and two at high risk. CONCLUSIONS: This review indicates that this line of inquiry is still developing. There are a number of gaps yet to be filled. The current evidence for the effectiveness of police-based pre-booking diversion programs in reducing arrests (i.e., reducing criminalization) of people with mental illnesses is limited. However, these studies indicate there is moderate evidence that these programs increase linkages to mental health services.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.148
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.130

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.148
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.009
Bibliometrics0.0200.016
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.258
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.146 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingFrench-language works237,207