ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT06311838Updated Sep 10, 2026

Building Social and Structural Connections for the Prevention of Opioid Use Disorder Among Youth Experiencing Homelessness

An interventional study of Motivational Interviewing/Community Reinforcement Approach (MI/CRA) and Strengths-Based Outreach and Advocacy (SBOA ) in Opioid Use Disorder, Dual Diagnosis and Housing Problems, sponsored by Ohio State University. Recruiting at 2 sites in United States. Open to participants aged 14 Years to 24 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-09-10.

Sponsored by Ohio State University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

From the registry’s dates

  • Started May 2024; still recruiting 2 years 6 months later.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
300
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
14 Years to 24 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Homelessness severely affects health and well-being and is particularly negative for youth. Between 70-95% of youth experiencing homelessness (YEH) report problem substance use and 66-89% have a mental health disorder. Youth appear to be at greater risk for living on the streets or being homeless than adults and are more vulnerable to long term consequences of homelessness. Multiple social determinants of health (SDOH) are uniquely associated with homelessness, driving substance use and adverse mental health consequences. However, limited research has identified pragmatic interventions that have a long-term ameliorating impact on the complex, multi-symptomatic issues among these youth. This study overcomes prior gaps in research through testing a multi-component comprehensive prevention intervention targeting SDOH that may affect biopsychosocial health indicators and longer-term health outcomes. In partnership with a drop-in center for YEH, youth between the ages of 14 to 24 years, will be engaged and randomly assigned to conditions using a dismantling design so that essential intervention components can be efficiently identified. In particular, youth (N = 300) will be randomly assigned to a) Motivational Interviewing/Community Reinforcement Approach + Services as Usual (MI/CRA + SAU, n = 80), b) Strengths-Based Outreach and Advocacy + Services As Usual (SBOA + SAU, n = 80), c) MI/CRA + SBOA + SAU (n = 80) or d) SAU (n=60) through the drop-in center. In order to assess the longer-term prevention effects on substance use, mental health and other outcomes, all youth will be assessed at baseline and at 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24-months post-baseline. The primary goal of this study is to establish the impact of a comprehensive intervention embedded within a system that serves YEH, a community drop-in center, on youth's opioid misuse and disorder, other substance misuse and disorders, mental health diagnoses, and other targeted outcomes. This study will offer unique information on the physiological and psychological stress pathways underlying change for specific subgroups of youth along with cost estimates to inform future implementation efforts in drop-in centers around the country.

Read the detailed description

Specific Aim 1. Using a dismantling randomized design, compare intervention conditions to determine those components essential for optimizing substance use and mental health: a) Strengths-Based Outreach and Advocacy (SBOA), b) Motivational Interviewing (MI)/Community Reinforcement Approach (CRA), c) SBOA+MI/CRA, and d) Services As Usual (SAU). Hypothesis. Youth assigned to SBOA+MI/CRA will show better short and long-term outcomes on Opioid Use Disorder prevention and on other substance use and mental health outcomes than youth assigned to either intervention alone or Services As Usual.

Specific Aim 2. Test whether intended change processes (social stability, psychosocial resources, stress) produce the desired change on substance use and mental health. Hypothesis. Inasmuch as the interventions trigger successful increases in social stability and psychosocial resources and reductions in stress, targeted outcomes will improve.

Specific Aim 3. Explore how the moderators of age, sex, race/ethnicity, sexual/gender minority status, and experience of childhood abuse and neglect influence intervention response.

Specific Aim 4. Determine cost effectiveness of the intervention approaches.

02

Conditions studied

  • Opioid Use Disorder
  • Dual Diagnosis
  • Housing Problems
  • Mental Disorder in Adolescence
  • Risk Behavior
  • Homelessness

Keywords

  • youth experiencing homelessness
  • social determinants of health
  • opioid use disorder
  • substance use
03

In context

Opioid-Related Disorders

1,472 studies on the registry are indexed under Opioid-Related Disorders; 290 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 300 is above the median of 63 across 1,166 interventional studies indexed under Opioid-Related Disorders.

Browse Opioid-Related Disorders studies →

Lead sponsor

Ohio State University is the lead sponsor of 663 studies on the registry; 148 are open to participants now.

Of its 67 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 49 (73%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
14 Years to 24 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Youth must meet the criteria for homelessness as defined by the McKinney-Vento Act: children and youth who lack a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence; or live in a welfare hotel, or place without regular sleeping accommodations, or live in a shared residence with other persons due to the loss of one's housing or economic hardship
  • Must speak english adequately to complete measures

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Youth who have a stable housing situation.
  • Non-English speaker
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
300 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Motivational Interviewing/Community Reinforcement Approach + Services as Usual (MI/CRA + SAU)

    The current evidence base recommends integrating treatments targeting both Substance Use Disorder and psychiatric disorders, especially combining Motivational Interviewing with behavioral interventions such as CRA or Cognitive Behaviorial Therapy. Enhancing intrinsic motivation for behavioral change is the central purpose of motivational interviewing (MI), a clinical method built on the insights and strategies described by Carl Rogers as client-centered therapy. MI is also directive, however, in selectively eliciting and reinforcing client "change talk". Typically offered as a brief intervention of 1-2 sessions, MI has a strong record of efficacy in the treatment of alcohol and other drug use disorders, mental health and other problematic behaviors. The Community Reinforcement Approach (CRA) offers an empirically-based multifaceted approach to substance abuse/mental health treatment that also addresses many of the clinical needs of multi-problem homeless individuals.

    Behavioral: Motivational Interviewing/Community Reinforcement Approach (MI/CRA) · Behavioral: Services as Usual (SAU)

  • Experimental
    Strengths-Based Outreach and Advocacy + Services As Usual (SBOA +SAU)

    Some research suggests that engagement with an advocate is key to success when linking those experiencing homelessness to available services and supports in the community. The strengths model is based on the premise that the purpose of advocacy "is to assist consumers in identifying, securing, and preserving the range of resources, both external and internal, needed to live in a normal, independent way in the community". Strengths-based interventions focus on enhancing well-being and happiness rather than attempting to correct deficits or pathology. The advocate takes responsibility for securing needed services for the youth and remains a support as they traverse the system of care. The focus of the first several weeks of advocacy is on obtaining identification and ensuring basic needs are met (food, safety, medical care, housing, etc.). As basic needs are addressed, youth and advocates focus on other high need areas including education, employment, mental health and substance use.

    Behavioral: Strengths-Based Outreach and Advocacy (SBOA ) · Behavioral: Services as Usual (SAU)

  • Experimental
    Motivational Interviewing/Community Reinforcement Approach (MI/CRA) + SBOA + SAU

    This intervention combines all three interventional models: Motivational Interviewing/Community Reinforcement Approach along with Strengths-Based Outreach and Advocacy and the Services as Usual.

    Behavioral: Motivational Interviewing/Community Reinforcement Approach (MI/CRA) · Behavioral: Strengths-Based Outreach and Advocacy (SBOA ) · Behavioral: Services as Usual (SAU)

  • Active comparator
    Services as Usual (SAU)

    All youth will receive services as usual provided by the drop-in center.

    Behavioral: Services as Usual (SAU)

Interventions

  • BehavioralMotivational Interviewing/Community Reinforcement Approach (MI/CRA)

    MI/CRA includes two Motivational Interviewing sessions and twelve 1-hour Community Reinforcement Approach sessions.

  • BehavioralStrengths-Based Outreach and Advocacy (SBOA )

    The number of Strengths-Based Outreach and Advocacy sessions participants will receive are flexibly determined based upon youth needs.

  • BehavioralServices as Usual (SAU)

    Participants assigned to this group will receive the standard services provided to all youth involved with the drop-in center.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Form 90 Substance Use interview

    Self-reported interviewer-administered Form 90 Substance Use interview developed for National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) funded Project Match. The Form 90 differentiates illicit drug use from prescribed drug use including marijuana.

    Time frame: Administered at baseline, and 3-, 6-, and 12-, 18-, and 24-months post intervention.

  2. Shortened Inventory of Problems - Alcohol and Drugs (SIP-AD)

    The SIP-AD measures consequences related to impulse control and social responsibility, as well as physical, interpersonal, and intrapersonal domains with good psychometric properties.

    Time frame: Administered at baseline, and 3-, 6-, and 12-, 18-, and 24-months post intervention.

  3. Presence of drugs of abuse

    One-step BMC ToxCup® Urine Test Kit Provides instant reading urine test for the presence or lack of detection of cannabinoids, amphetamines, methamphetamines, phencyclidine (PCP), cocaine/crack, and opiates. (Branan Medical Corp., Irvine, CA). Detection levels: Marijuana 50 ng/ml Cocaine 150 ng/ml Opiates 300 ng/ml Methamphetamine 500 ng/ml Ecstasy 500 ng/ml Phencyclidine 25 ng/ml Propoxyphene 300 ng/ml Benzodiazepines 300 ng/ml Barbiturates 300 ng/ml Methadone 300 ng/ml Buprenorphine 10 ng/ml Tricyclic Antidepressants 1000 ng/ml Oxycodone 100 ng/ml

    Time frame: Administered at baseline, and 3-, 6-, and 12-, 18-, and 24-months post intervention.

  4. Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI-II)

    The most frequently used self-report instrument to assess mood, cognitive and somatic aspects of depression. The BDI-II has good psychometric properties. Scores range from 0 - 63 with higher scores indicating more depressived symptoms and worse outcomes.

    Time frame: Administered at baseline, and 3-, 6-, and 12-, 18-, and 24-months post intervention.

  5. Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI)

    Used to assess current anxiety symptoms via 21 items, rated in intensity with scores ranging from 0-63. It was developed to discriminate symptoms of anxiety from depressive symptoms, and has alpha coefficients ranging from 0.90-0.94. Higher scores indicate more anxiety symptoms and worse outcomes.

    Time frame: Administered at baseline, and 3-, 6-, and 12-, 18-, and 24-months post intervention.

  6. Short Form-12

    Standardized, internationally used instrument that provides a general measure of health status.The 12 items on the SF-12 are summarized in two weighted summary scales, and generate a mental health and physical health score. Scores range from 1 -100. Lower scores indicate poorer health. Construct validity has been evaluated with adult users of a homeless day shelter

    Time frame: Administered at baseline, and 3-, 6-, and 12-, 18-, and 24-months post intervention.

07

Study locations

2 of 2 sites recruiting
  • Star House
    Columbus, Ohio 43201, United States
    Recruiting
  • Ohio State University
    Columbus, Ohio 43210, United States
    Recruiting
    • Jodi Ford, PhD · Contactford.553@osu.edu · 614-292-6862
    • Natasha Slesnick, PhD · Contactslesnick.5@osu.edu · (614) 247-8469
    • Jodi Ford, PhD · Principal investigator
    • Natasha Slesnick, PhD · Principal investigator
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Ford J, Slesnick N, Browning C, Feng X, Yilmazer T, Boettner B, Luthy J, Fitzpatrick M, Pinkus L, Holowacz E, Hang C. Building social and structural connections for the prevention of opioid use among youth experiencing homelessness: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. BMC Public Health. 2026 Jul 15. doi: 10.1186/s12889-026-28177-4. Online ahead of print. PubMed 42449276 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes — The proposed research for public-use data sharing will include three data types: survey data, stress biomarker data, and activity-space data. The final survey dataset will include self-reported demographic, behavioral, social (e.g. exposures to adversity, including homelessness, violence, incarceration, etc.) and health-related data (e.g. psychosocial measures, mental and physical health symptoms/disorders and diagnoses, health services). The data will be deposited with the Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR), an NIH funded data repository supported by National Institute on Drug Abuse as a data repository. The data from all 300 participants will be available for the six time-points of collection, made available in ICPSR preferred formats (e.g., CSV, SAS, SPSS) and securely transferred to ICPSR. Identifying (individual and location data) and personal health information will NOT be shared to protect participant confidentiality.

Supporting information: Study protocol, Statistical analysis plan, Informed consent form

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Started May 2024 (actual). Primary completion is estimated for Dec 2028, 54 months after the start.

Of 464 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Opioid-Related Disorders, half reached primary completion within 29 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 14 and three quarters within 47. This study's planned 54 months is above that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 495 studies reached it within 29 months; a quarter within 13 and three quarters within 46.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Feb 26, 2024
First posted
Mar 15, 2024
StartActual
May 6, 2024
Primary completionEst.
Dec 1, 2028
CompletionEst.
Dec 1, 2029
Last update
Sep 10, 2026
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Sep 10, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06311838
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Mar 15, 2024
Start date
May 6, 2024
Primary completion
Dec 1, 2028 (estimated)
Completion
Dec 1, 2029 (estimated)
Last update
Sep 10, 2026

Study contacts

Jodi Ford, PhD
Contact
ford.553@osu.edu
614-292-6862
Natasha Slesnick, PhD
Contact
slesnick.5@osu.edu
(614) 247-8469

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion