Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Jan;43(1):67-78.
doi: 10.1007/s10488-014-0620-y.

Use of Pooled State Administrative Data for Mental Health Services Research

Affiliations

Use of Pooled State Administrative Data for Mental Health Services Research

Kimberly Eaton Hoagwood et al. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2016 Jan.

Abstract

State systems are a rich, albeit challenging, laboratory for policy-relevant services research studies. State mental health authorities routinely devote resources to collect data for state planning and reporting purposes. However, these data are rarely used in cross-state comparisons to inform state or federal policy development. In 2008, in response to key recommendations from the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) Advisory Council's "The Road Ahead: Research Partnership to Transform Services," (http://www.nimh.nih.gov/about/advisory-boards-and-groups/namhc/reports/road-ahead.pdf), NIMH issued a request for applications (RFA) to support studies on the impact of state policy changes on access, cost, quality and outcomes of care for individuals with mental disorders. The purpose of the RFA was to bridge the divide between research and policy by encouraging research that used state administrative data across states, and to address significant state-defined health policy initiatives. Five projects involving eight states were selected through peer review for funding. Projects began in 2009 and were funded for 3 years. This report provides a brief description of the five projects, followed by an analysis of the impact, challenges, and lessons learned from these policy-partnered studies. We conclude by offering suggestions on ways to use state administrative data for informing state health policies, which is especially timely given national and state changes in the structure and financing of healthcare.

Keywords: Mental health; Policy; States; Systems.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Bowen S, Zwi AB. Pathways to “evidence-informed” policy and practice: A framework for action. PLoS Medicine. 2005;2(7):e166. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0020166. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Byrd, V. L. H., & Dodd, A. H. (2012). Assessing the usability of encounter data for enrollees in comprehensive managed care across MAX 2007–2009. MAX Medicaid Policy Brief 15. http://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Computer-Data-an.... - PMC - PubMed
    1. Byrd, V. L. H. & Dodd, A. H. (2013). Assessing the usability of MAX 2008 encounter data for comprehensive managed care. Medicare and Medicaid Research Review. 3(1):E1–E18. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Campbell JD, Zerzan J, Garrison LP., Jr Libby AM (2013). Comparative-effectiveness research to aid population decision making by relating clinical outcomes and quality-adjusted life years. Clinical Therapeutics. 2013;35(4):364–370. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2013.02.011. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Dobrow MJ, Goel V, Upshur RE. Evidence-based health policy: context and utilization. Social Science Medicine. 2004;58(1):207–217. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(03)00166-7. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources