Bridging mental health and criminal justice systems: A systematic review of the impact of mental health courts on individuals and communities

Kelli Canada, Stacey Barrenger, Bradley Ray

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    Existing reviews of mental health courts summarize the effectiveness of these programs without consideration of the component parts of the mental health court and who the court serves. This systematic review addresses this gap by using specific criteria for what constitutes a mental health court and presents results based on the charge type for the target population. Only experimental or quasi-experimental research designs are included in this review. Studies included involved mental health courts containing essential elements and included measures of recidivism or other mental health and quality of life-related outcomes. Twenty-nine articles were reviewed. Research on mental health courts primarily originated in the Unites States, covering 14 states. Findings are synthesized by whether the courts served people with felony, misdemeanor, or combination charges. These findings inform the need for national or international standards or clear guidelines for what components or elements define a mental health court. State-level policy is also needed to encourage the systematic collection of data on mental health courts to inform who mental health courts work for in specific communities. These data can also be used to inform local mental health court policy decisions.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)73-91
    Number of pages19
    JournalPsychology, Public Policy, and Law
    Volume25
    Issue number2
    DOIs
    StatePublished - May 1 2019

    Fingerprint

    Criminal Law
    Mental Health
    justice
    mental health
    community
    Research Design
    misdemeanor
    Health Services Needs and Demand
    Program Evaluation
    Jurisprudence
    Health Policy
    research planning
    quality of life
    Quality of Life
    Guidelines

    Keywords

    • Essential elements
    • Mental health courts
    • Systematic review

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Social Psychology
    • Sociology and Political Science
    • Law

    Cite this

    Bridging mental health and criminal justice systems : A systematic review of the impact of mental health courts on individuals and communities. / Canada, Kelli; Barrenger, Stacey; Ray, Bradley.

    In: Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, Vol. 25, No. 2, 01.05.2019, p. 73-91.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    @article{453ed60cd6c1404b9907e2dc7034553e,
    title = "Bridging mental health and criminal justice systems: A systematic review of the impact of mental health courts on individuals and communities",
    abstract = "Existing reviews of mental health courts summarize the effectiveness of these programs without consideration of the component parts of the mental health court and who the court serves. This systematic review addresses this gap by using specific criteria for what constitutes a mental health court and presents results based on the charge type for the target population. Only experimental or quasi-experimental research designs are included in this review. Studies included involved mental health courts containing essential elements and included measures of recidivism or other mental health and quality of life-related outcomes. Twenty-nine articles were reviewed. Research on mental health courts primarily originated in the Unites States, covering 14 states. Findings are synthesized by whether the courts served people with felony, misdemeanor, or combination charges. These findings inform the need for national or international standards or clear guidelines for what components or elements define a mental health court. State-level policy is also needed to encourage the systematic collection of data on mental health courts to inform who mental health courts work for in specific communities. These data can also be used to inform local mental health court policy decisions.",
    keywords = "Essential elements, Mental health courts, Systematic review",
    author = "Kelli Canada and Stacey Barrenger and Bradley Ray",
    year = "2019",
    month = "5",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1037/law0000194",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "25",
    pages = "73--91",
    journal = "Psychology, Public Policy, and Law",
    issn = "1076-8971",
    publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
    number = "2",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Bridging mental health and criminal justice systems

    T2 - A systematic review of the impact of mental health courts on individuals and communities

    AU - Canada, Kelli

    AU - Barrenger, Stacey

    AU - Ray, Bradley

    PY - 2019/5/1

    Y1 - 2019/5/1

    N2 - Existing reviews of mental health courts summarize the effectiveness of these programs without consideration of the component parts of the mental health court and who the court serves. This systematic review addresses this gap by using specific criteria for what constitutes a mental health court and presents results based on the charge type for the target population. Only experimental or quasi-experimental research designs are included in this review. Studies included involved mental health courts containing essential elements and included measures of recidivism or other mental health and quality of life-related outcomes. Twenty-nine articles were reviewed. Research on mental health courts primarily originated in the Unites States, covering 14 states. Findings are synthesized by whether the courts served people with felony, misdemeanor, or combination charges. These findings inform the need for national or international standards or clear guidelines for what components or elements define a mental health court. State-level policy is also needed to encourage the systematic collection of data on mental health courts to inform who mental health courts work for in specific communities. These data can also be used to inform local mental health court policy decisions.

    AB - Existing reviews of mental health courts summarize the effectiveness of these programs without consideration of the component parts of the mental health court and who the court serves. This systematic review addresses this gap by using specific criteria for what constitutes a mental health court and presents results based on the charge type for the target population. Only experimental or quasi-experimental research designs are included in this review. Studies included involved mental health courts containing essential elements and included measures of recidivism or other mental health and quality of life-related outcomes. Twenty-nine articles were reviewed. Research on mental health courts primarily originated in the Unites States, covering 14 states. Findings are synthesized by whether the courts served people with felony, misdemeanor, or combination charges. These findings inform the need for national or international standards or clear guidelines for what components or elements define a mental health court. State-level policy is also needed to encourage the systematic collection of data on mental health courts to inform who mental health courts work for in specific communities. These data can also be used to inform local mental health court policy decisions.

    KW - Essential elements

    KW - Mental health courts

    KW - Systematic review

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85064759406&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85064759406&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1037/law0000194

    DO - 10.1037/law0000194

    M3 - Article

    AN - SCOPUS:85064759406

    VL - 25

    SP - 73

    EP - 91

    JO - Psychology, Public Policy, and Law

    JF - Psychology, Public Policy, and Law

    SN - 1076-8971

    IS - 2

    ER -