The baltimore City Drug Treatment Court: 3-year self-report outcome study

Evaluation Review

Volumn 29, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 44-64

  Gottfredson, Denise C ^a   Kearley, Brook W ^a   Najaka, Stacy S ^a   Rocha, Carlos M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

Drug treatment courts; Randomized experiment

Indexed keywords

ADDICTION; ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG CONTROL; DRUG DEPENDENCE TREATMENT; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; INTERVIEW; JURISPRUDENCE; LEGAL ASPECT; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; TIME; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES;

ADULT; BALTIMORE; DRUG AND NARCOTIC CONTROL; FEMALE; HEALTH SURVEYS; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS; JUDICIAL ROLE; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PROGRAM EVALUATION; SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT CENTERS; SUBSTANCE-RELATED DISORDERS; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 16644401949     PISSN: 0193841X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0193841X04269908     Document Type: Review

References (29)

1. Bar Association of Baltimore City. 1990. The drug crisis and underfunding of the justice system in Baltimore City. Report of the Russell Committee 9.
2. Barnard, John, Constantine E. Frangakis, Jennifer L. Hill, and Donald B. Rubin. 2003. Principal stratification approach to broken randomized experiments: A case study of school choice vouchers in New York City. Journal of American Statistical Association 98 (462): 299-323.
3. Belenko, Steven. 1998. Research on drug courts: A critical review. National Drug Court Institute Review 1 (1): 1-42.
4. _. 1999, Research on drug courts: A critical review-1999 update. National Drug Court Institute Review 2 (2): 1-58.
5. _. 2001. Research on drug courts: A critical review - 2001 update. New York: The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University.
6. _. 2002. The challenges of conducting research in drug treatment court settings. Substance Use and Misuse 37:1635-64.
7. Cosden, Meredith, Stacey Peerson, and Micah Orliss. 2000. Santa Barbara County substance abuse treatment courts: Year2000 evaluation. SantaBarbara: University of California, Santa Barbara.
8. Crumpton, David, Jodi Brekhus, Judy Weller, and Michael W. Finigan. 2004. Cost analysis of Baltimore City, Maryland drug treatment court. Report to the Administrative Office of the Courts of Maryland and Baltimore Substance Abuse Systems, Inc.
9. Derogatis, Leonard R. 1996. Brief Symptom Inventory. Eagan, MN: NCS Pearson.
10. Drug Courts Program Office. 1997. Defining drug courts: The key components. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.
11. Finigan, Michael W. 1999. Assessing cost off-sets in a drug court setting. National Drug Court Institute Review 15(1): 41-51.
12. Goldkamp, John S., Michael D. White, and Jennifer B. Robinson. 2001. Do drug courts work? betting inside the drug court black box. Journal of Drug Issues 31:27-72.
13. Gottfredson, Denise C., Kristen Coblentz, and Michele A. Harmon, 1997. A short-term outcome evaluation of the Baltimore City Drug Treatment Court program. Perspectives Winter:33-38.
14. Gottfredson, Denise, and Lyn Exum. 2002. The Baltimore City Drug Court: One-year results from a randomized study. Journal of Research on Crime and Delinquency 39:337-56.
15. Gottfredson, Denise C., Stacy S. Najaka, and Brook W. Kearley, 2002. A randomized study of the Baltimore City Drug Treatment Court: Results from the three-year follow-up. Paper presented at the American Society of Criminology Conference, Chicago.
16. _. 2003. A randomized study of the Baltimore City Drug Treatment Court: Results from the two-year follow-up. Criminology and Public Policy 1(2): 171-96.
17. Gottfredson, Denise C., Stacy S. Najaka, Brook W. Kearley, and Carlos Rocha. 2003. Baltimore City Drug Treatment Court: Final evaluation report. College Park: University of Maryland.
18. Hare, Robert D., Timothy J. Harpur, A. R. Hakstian, Adelle E. Forth, Stephen D. Hart, and Joseph P. Newman. 1990. The revised Psychopathy Checklist: Reliability and factor structure. Psychological Assessment 2:338-41.
19. Harrell, Adele, Shannon Cavanagh, and John Roman. 1998. Findings from the evaluation of the D.C. Superior Court Drug Intervention Program: Final report. Washington. DC: Urban Institute.
20. Hora, Peggy F., William G. Schma, and John T. Rosenthal. 1999. Therapeutic jurisprudence and the drug treatment court movement: Revolutionizing the criminal justice system's response to drug abuse and crime in America. Notre Dame Law Review 74 (2): 439-538.
21. Kearley, Brook, and Denise C. Gottfredson. 2003. Predicting success in the Baltimore City Drug Treatment Court: The influence of personal characteristics and assigned sentence length on graduation status. Paper presented at the American Society of Criminology Conference, Denver, CO.
22. Kurki, Lena. 1999, Incorporating restorative and community justice into American sentencing and corrections (NCJ 1757234). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice.
23. Lipsey. Mark W. 1998. Design sensitivity: Statistical power for applied experimental research. In Handbook of applied social research methods, ed. L. Bickman and D. J. Rogers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
24. Longshore, Douglas, Susan Turner, Suzanne Wenzel, Andrew Morral, Adele Harrell, Duane McBride, Elizabeth Deschenes, and Martin Iguchi. 2001. Drug courts: A conceptual framework, Journal of Drug Issues 31:7-26.
25. McLellan, A. Thomas. Harvey Kushner, David Metzger, Roger Peters, Iris Smith, Grant Grissom, Helen Pettinati, and Milton Argeriou. 1992. The fifth edition of the Addiction Severity Index. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 9:199-213.
26. Turner, Susan, Peter Greenwood, Terry Fain, and Elizabeth Deschenes. 1999. Perceptions of drug court: How offenders view ease of program completion, strengths and weaknesses, and the impact on their lives. National Drug Court Institute Review 2 (1): 61-86.
27. U.S. General Accounting Office. 1997. Drug courts: Overview of growth, characteristics, and results. GAO/GGD-97-106. Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office.
28. Wexler, David B., and Bruce J. Winick. 1991. Therapeutic jurisprudence as a new approach to mental health law policy analysis and research. University of Miami Law Review 45:979.
29. Wilson, David B., Ojhmarrah Mitchell, and Doris MacKenzie, 2002. A systematic review of drug court effects on recidivism. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology. Chicago.