Background: Currently, there are more than two million people in prisons or jails, with nearly two-thirds meeting the criteria for a substance use disorder. Following these patterns, overdose is the leading cause of death following release from prison and the third leading cause of death during periods of incarceration in jails. Traditional quantitative methods analyzing the factors associated with overdose following incarceration may fail to capture structural and environmental factors present in specific communities. People with lived experiences in the criminal legal system and with substance use disorder hold unique perspectives and must be involved in the research process. Objective: To identify perceived factors that impact overdose following release from incarceration among people with direct criminal legal involvement and experience with substance use. Methods: Within a community-engaged approach to research, we used concept mapping to center the perspectives of people with personal experience with the carceral system. The following prompt guided our study: "What do you think are some of the main things that make people who have been in jail or prison more and less likely to overdose?" Individuals participated in three rounds of focus groups, which included brainstorming, sorting and rating, and community interpretation. We used the Concept Systems Inc. platform group wisdom for our analyses and constructed cluster maps. Results: Eight individuals (ages 33 to 53) from four states participated. The brainstorming process resulted in 83 unique factors that impact overdose. The concept mapping process resulted in five clusters: (1) Community-Based Prevention, (2) Drug Use and Incarceration, (3) Resources for Treatment for Substance Use, (4) Carceral Factors, and (5) Stigma and Structural Barriers. Conclusions: Our study provides critical insight into community-identified factors associated with overdose following incarceration. These factors should be accounted for during resource planning and decision-making.

HIV disproportionately affects populations experiencing incarceration. Preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is an effective approach to preventing HIV acquisition among populations at increased risk of acquiring HIV. Yet few, if any, efforts have been made to offer PrEP in correctional settings. Beginning in November 2019, the Rhode Island Department of Corrections (RIDOC) implemented a systemwide PrEP initiation program with linkage to PrEP care in the community upon reentry. Incarcerated individuals identified as being potentially at increased risk of HIV acquisition during standard clinical screenings and medical care were referred to a PrEP care provider for potential PrEP initiation. Of the 309 people who met with a PrEP care provider, 35% (n = 109; 88 men, 21 women) agreed to initiate PrEP while incarcerated. Clinical testing and evaluation were completed for 82% (n = 89; 69 men, 20 women) of those who agreed to initiate PrEP. Of those, 54% (n = 48; 29 men, 19 women) completed the necessary clinical evaluation to initiate PrEP, were determined to be appropriate candidates for PrEP use, and had the medication delivered to a RIDOC facility for initiation. Only 8 people (4 men, 4 women) were successfully linked to a PrEP care provider in the community after release. The RIDOC experience demonstrates notable levels of PrEP interest and moderate levels of PrEP uptake among this population. However, PrEP engagement in care after release and persistence in taking PrEP when in the community were relatively poor, indicating a need to better understand approaches to overcoming barriers to PrEP care in this unique setting.

Background: Incarceration is associated with negative impacts on mental health. Probation, a form of community supervision, has been lauded as an alternative. However, the effect of probation versus incarceration on mental health is unclear. Our objective was to estimate the impact on mental health of reducing sentencing severity at individuals' first adult criminal-legal encounter. Methods: We used the US National Longitudinal Survey on Youth 1997, a nationally representative dataset of youth followed into their mid-thirties. Restricting to those with an adult encounter (arrest, charge alone or no sentence, probation, incarceration), we used parametric g-computation to estimate the difference in mental health at age 30 (Mental Health Inventory-5) if (1) everyone who received incarceration for their first encounter had received probation and (2) everyone who received probation had received no sentence. Results: Among 1835 individuals with adult encounters, 19% were non-Hispanic Black and 65% were non-Hispanic White. Median age at first encounter was 20. Under hypothetical interventions to reduce sentencing, we did not see better mental health overall (Intervention 1, incarceration to probation: RD = -0.01; CI = -0.02, 0.01; Intervention 2, probation to no sentence: RD = 0.00; CI = -0.01, 0.01) or when stratified by race. Conclusion: Among those with criminal-legal encounters, hypothetical interventions to reduce sentencing, including incremental sentencing reductions, were not associated with improved mental health. Future work should consider the effects of preventing individuals' first criminal-legal encounter.

This Viewpoint explains the Medicaid Reentry Section 1115 Demonstration Opportunity of April 2023 and recommends strategies to optimize this opportunity for community connection and mental health care.

While criminal legal involvement is a structural determinant of health, both administrative and national longitudinal cohort data are collected and made available in a way that prevents a full understanding of this relationship. Administrative data are both collected and overseen by the same entity and are incomplete, delayed, and/or uninterpretable. Cohort data often only ask these questions to the most vulnerable, and do not include all types of criminal legal involvement, when this involvement occurs in someone's life, or family and community involvement. To achieve a more optimized data landscape and to facilitate population-level research on criminal legal involvement and health, (1) individual administrative level data must be made available and able to be linked across carceral systems, (2) a national data archive must be made to maintain and make criminal legal data available to researchers, and (3) a nationally representative, longitudinal study focused on those with criminal legal involvement is necessary. By beginning to critically think about how future data could be collated and collected, we can begin to provide more robust evidence around how the criminal legal system impacts the health of our society and, in turn, create policy reform.