A systematic review of drug court effects on recidivism

480 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Rehabilitation: Beyond Nothing Works (2013, background): “Initial results suggest that they are at least modestly successful in reducing recidivism (see, e.g., Wilson, Mitchell, and MacKenzie 2006; Sarteschi 2009; Cross 2011; Mitchell 2011; Shaffer 2011).”
Effects of Motivational Enhancement on Immediate Outcomes of Batterer Intervention (2011, background): “The drug court movement in the United States has provided a strong demonstration of the value of coupling engaging and supportive mandated intervention with strong programmatic and judicial responses to failures to comply (Wilson et al. 2006).”
THEORETICAL AND RESEARCH SUPPORT FOR THE DULUTH MODEL: A REPLY TO DUTTON AND CORVO (2007, result): “Reviews and meta-analysis of the evaluation research of this approach have been impressively positive and supportive of “ coerced treatment ” (for most recent review, see Wilson, Mitchell, & MacKenzie, 2006).”
Looking Inside the Black Box of Drug Courts: A Meta‐Analytic Review (2011, background): “Wilson et al. (2006) estimated a mean odds ratio = 1.66 in their systematic review and reported a range of odds ratios from 0.60 to 25.00.”
Assessing the effectiveness of drug courts on recidivism: A meta-analytic review of traditional and non-traditional drug courts (2012, background): “A larger systematic review conducted by Wilson et al. (2006) synthesized the findings of 55 evaluations of drug courts for adult and juvenile offenders.”