Table 1.
Overview of Reviewed Studies
| Ballard 2012a | Ballard 2013 | Grupp-Phelan 2012 | Horowitz 2010a | Langerman 2019 | Middleman 1995b | O’Mara 2012 | Vaughn 2020 | Williams 2011c | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Study Objectives | Secondary to screening effort | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||
| Youth attitudes | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Caregiver attitudes | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||||
| Provider attitudes | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||||
| Sample Type | Convenience | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Systematic | ✓ | ✓ | |||||||||
| Sample Sociodemographics | Sex | % Male | 43.6 | 41.4 | NR | 43.6 | 31.4♦ | 44.0* | 52.0 | 33.0• | ~50 |
| Age | Age range | 10-21 | 10-21 | 12-17 | 10-21 | 13-17 | 24-34* | 13-17 | 14-18 | 4-18 | |
| Race/Ethnicity | White (%) | 14.7 | 72.1 | NR | 14.7 | 9.7♦ | 84.0* | 72.0 | NR | 63.9 | |
| Black (%) | 66.7 | 15.2 | NR | 66.7 | 71.3♦ | NR | 16.0 | NR | 32.8 | ||
| Hispanic (%) | 5.1 | 1.8 | NR | 5.1 | 16.9♦ | NR | 5.0 | NR | NR | ||
| Other (%) | 13.5 | 20.9 | NR | 13.5 | 7.2♦ | NR | 12.0 | NR | NR | ||
| Insurance Type | Public (%) | 44.2 | 35.2 | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | 35.3 | |
| Private (%) | 51.9 | 51.5 | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | 52.9 | ||
| None/Other (%) | 3.8 | 13.3 | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | 11.8 | ||
| Caregiver sex | % Female | NA | NA | NA | NA | NR | NA | 73.0 | NR | NR | |
| Caregiver age | Mean age | NA | NA | NA | NA | NR | NA | NR | NR | 36.8 | |
| Caregiver Relationship | Biological mother (%) | NA | NA | NA | NA | NR | NA | 72.0 | NR | NR | |
| Biological father (%) | NA | NA | NA | NA | NR | NA | 21.0 | NR | NR | ||
| Other (%) | NA | NA | NA | NA | NR | NA | 7.0 | NR | NR | ||
| Caregiver Race | White (%) | NA | NA | NA | NA | NR | NA | 79.0 | NR | NR | |
| Black (%) | NA | NA | NA | NA | NR | NA | 15.0 | NR | NR | ||
| Hispanic (%) | NA | NA | NA | NA | NR | NA | 4.0 | NR | NR | ||
| Other (%) | NA | NA | NA | NA | NR | NA | NR | NR | NR | ||
| Caregiver Education | High school (%) | NA | NA | NA | NA | NR | NA | 18.0 | NR | 26.0 | |
| Some college (%) | NA | NA | NA | NA | NR | NA | 26.0 | NR | 35.0 | ||
| College or more (%) | NA | NA | NA | NA | NR | NA | 55.0 | NR | NR | ||
| Assessment Method Used | Interview | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||
| Survey | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||
| Exploration Phase | Outer Context | Sociopolitical | |||||||||
| Funding | |||||||||||
| Client Advocacy | |||||||||||
| Inner Context | Interorganizational networks | ||||||||||
| Organizational characteristics | |||||||||||
| Individual adopter characteristics | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||||
| Adoption Decision/Preparation Phase | Outer Context | Sociopolitical | |||||||||
| Funding | |||||||||||
| Client Advocacy | |||||||||||
| Interorganizational networks | |||||||||||
| Inner Context | Organizational characteristics | ||||||||||
| Leadership | |||||||||||
| Implementation Phase | Outer Context | Sociopolitical | |||||||||
| Funding | |||||||||||
| Interorganizational networks | |||||||||||
| Intervention developers | |||||||||||
| Leadership | |||||||||||
| Inner Context | Organizational characteristics | ||||||||||
| Innovation-values fit | ✓ | ||||||||||
| Individual adopter characteristics | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||
| Sustainment Phase | Outer Context | Sociopolitical | |||||||||
| Funding | |||||||||||
| Public-academic collaboration | |||||||||||
| Inner Context | Organizational characteristics | ||||||||||
| Fidelity monitoring/support | |||||||||||
| Staffing | |||||||||||
*
Provider sociodemographic data presented; all other data presented for youth samples
♦
Represents pooled data across youth and caregiver participants
•
Represents pooled data across youth, caregiver, and provider participants
a
Sampled the same group of participants
b
Examined high-risk behavior screening with a secondary focus on depression/suicide
c
Used the Diagnostic Interview Schedule with Children (DISC) Predictive Scales (DPS), a mental health screen covering several domains including suicide