Advanced Search

Study Preview



Study Title and Description

Juvenile drug court: enhancing outcomes by integrating evidence-based treatments.



Key Questions Addressed
1 Evidence map
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Primary Publication Information
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
TitleData
Title Juvenile drug court: enhancing outcomes by integrating evidence-based treatments.
Author Henggeler SW., Halliday-Boykins CA., Cunningham PB., Randall J., Shapiro SB., Chapman JE.
Country Family Services Research Center, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA. henggesw@musc.edu
Year 2006
Numbers Pubmed ID: 16551142

Secondary Publication Information
There are currently no secondary publications defined for this study.


Extraction Form: Evidence Map
Arms
Number Title Description Comments
1 PeerGroup_b Family court with community services (FC)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
2 PeerGroup_a Drug court with community services (DC)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
3 Fam_PeerGroup Drug court + multisystemic therapy (DC/MST)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
4 Fam_CM_PeerGroup Drug court + multisystemic therapy + contingency managment (DC/MST/CM)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Design Details
Question... Follow Up Answer Follow-up Answer
Should this citation be included? Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Does this paper originate from a primary study of interest? No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Ages eligible (in years) 12
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
17
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Total sample size (in all arms) 161
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Age distribution of enrolled population (in years) 15.2
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Substance used Alcohol
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
SUD (not further described, except maybe excluding nicotine)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Alcohol
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
SUD (not further described, except maybe excluding nicotine)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Interventions studied? Behavioral
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Behavioral
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Outcome? Objective measurement of use/abstinence and/or intensity
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Self report of use/abstinence and/or intensity
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Substance-related problems or symptoms scale
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Legal
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Objective measurement of use/abstinence and/or intensity
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Self report of use/abstinence and/or intensity
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Substance-related problems or symptoms scale
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Legal
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Age variation of enrolled population (in years) 1.1
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Study type RCT
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Is any arm a brief intervention (or single session)? No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Income level of country(ies) of origin Upper income
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Upper income
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |




Results & Comparisons


Results Data
Outcome: alcohol use days      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure PeerGroup_b PeerGroup_a Fam_PeerGroup Fam_CM_PeerGroup


0 months

N Analyzed 33 31 29 37
Mean 1.91 1.16 1.28 7.86
SD 3.27 1.59 3.34 16.30
SE


4 months

N Analyzed 33 31 29 37
Mean 3.12 0.65 0.38 0.41
SD 7.91 2.51 0.90 0.98
SE


12 months

N Analyzed 33 31 29 37
Mean 6.06 1.48 1.55 0.30
SD 16.62 4.82 7.23 0.78
SE
Outcome: heavy drinking days      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure PeerGroup_b PeerGroup_a Fam_PeerGroup Fam_CM_PeerGroup


0 months

N Analyzed 33 31 29 37
Mean 0.79 0.51 0.55 4.32
SD 1.34 1.09 2.41 13.10
SE


4 months

N Analyzed 33 31 29 37
Mean 1.21 0.58 0.24 0.30
SD 4.74 2.51 0.58 0.88
SE


12 months

N Analyzed 33 31 29 37
Mean 2.70 1.32 0.10 0.19
SD 6.56 4.50 0.41 0.57
SE
Outcome: cannabis use days      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure PeerGroup_b PeerGroup_a Fam_PeerGroup Fam_CM_PeerGroup


0 months

N Analyzed 33 31 29 37
Mean 26.00 27.35 33.86 34.70
SD 25.33 24.50 27.76 29.96
SE


4 months

N Analyzed 33 31 29 37
Mean 12.12 4.16 3.62 6.97
SD 24.52 13.48 8.97 19.80
SE


12 months

N Analyzed 33 31 29 37
Mean 13.42 11.10 3.69 6.84
SD 25.11 25.30 16.66 19.92
SE
Outcome: nos use days      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure PeerGroup_b PeerGroup_a Fam_PeerGroup Fam_CM_PeerGroup


0 months

N Analyzed 33 31 29 37
Mean 1.27 0.90 1.21 7.08
SD 1.70 1.51 3.37 15.72
SE


4 months

N Analyzed 33 31 29 37
Mean 1.76 0.10 0.07 0.32
SD 5.95 0.30 0.37 1.06
SE


12 months

N Analyzed 33 31 29 37
Mean 4.76 2.16 0.10 0.32
SD 12.60 5.62 0.41 1.81
SE
Outcome: canabis use      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure PeerGroup_b PeerGroup_a Fam_PeerGroup Fam_CM_PeerGroup


4 months

N Analyzed 35 38 42
Mean 69.5 28.1 18.0
SD 30.8 29.0 17.7
SE


12 months

N Analyzed 27 29 38
Mean 44.8 7.0 17.3
SD 40.8 10.2 24.7
SE
Outcome: SRD      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure PeerGroup_b PeerGroup_a Fam_PeerGroup Fam_CM_PeerGroup


0 months

N Analyzed 32 29 29 37
Mean 7.8 8.6 15.4 13.9
SD 6.3 10.6 23.2 22.6
SE


4 months

N Analyzed 32 29 29 37
Mean 6.9 4.4 3.5 8.2
SD 11.0 7.4 4.7 19.0
SE


12 months

N Analyzed 32 29 29 37
Mean 16.8 1.4 2.6 3.5
SD 38.8 2.4 5.8 6.4
SE
Outcome: SRD      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure PeerGroup_b PeerGroup_a Fam_PeerGroup Fam_CM_PeerGroup


0 months

N Analyzed 32 29 29 37
Mean 8.9 5.2 6.2 4.4
SD 13.7 9.8 9.8 6.4
SE


4 months

N Analyzed 32 29 29 37
Mean 2.7 2.3 1.6 1.8
SD 5.4 5.2 5.2 3.0
SE


12 months

N Analyzed 32 29 29 37
Mean 2.5 1.9 1.0 1.2
SD 5.7 7.2 4.5 2.5
SE
Outcome: SRD      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure PeerGroup_b PeerGroup_a Fam_PeerGroup Fam_CM_PeerGroup


0 months

N Analyzed 32 29 29 37
Mean 9.5 3.7 6.9 4.2
SD 17.5 4.9 11.5 6.6
SE


4 months

N Analyzed 32 29 29 37
Mean 3.0 2.3 3.2 7.2
SD 5.5 4.6 4.2 21.0
SE


12 months

N Analyzed 32 29 29 37
Mean 10.7 1.0 2.8 1.8
SD 28.2 2.2 8.3 4.5
SE
Outcome: Arrests      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure PeerGroup_b PeerGroup_a Fam_PeerGroup Fam_CM_PeerGroup


0 months

N Analyzed 42 38 38 43
Mean nr nr nr nr
SD nr nr nr nr
SE


12 months

N Analyzed 42 38 38 43
Mean 1.00 1.45 1.40 1.28
SD 1.15 1.35 1.52 1.44
SE
Outcome: CBCL      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure PeerGroup_b PeerGroup_a Fam_PeerGroup Fam_CM_PeerGroup


0 months

N Analyzed 29 29 28 34
Mean 59.1 57.9 57.8 61.4
SD 12.7 11.2 15.2 8.5
SE


4 months

N Analyzed 29 29 28 34
Mean 55.7 56.1 53.4 52.4
SD 13.7 14.0 13.7 11.6
SE


12 months

N Analyzed 29 29 28 34
Mean 51.7 51.1 50.5 52.2
SD 12.0 11.2 14.9 13.3
SE


Quality Dimensions
Dimension Value Notes Comments
Intention-to-treat-analysis: Bias due to incomplete reporting and analysis according to group allocation Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Group similarity at baseline (selection bias): Selection bias due to dissimilarity at baseline for the most important prognostic indicators No Several dyssimilarities, not adjusted for
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Co-interventions (performance bias): Performance bias because co-interventions were different across groups Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Compliance (performance bias): Performance bias due to inappropriate compliance with interventions across groups No Data
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Timing of outcome assessments (detection bias): Detection bias because important outcomes were not measured at the same time across groups Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Additional Bias: Bias due to problems not covered elsewhere in the table. If yes, describe them in the Notes. No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Random sequence generation (selection bias): Selection bias (biased allocation to interventions) due to inadequate generation of a randomized sequence Low Assume low risk since factorial (more complex randomization scheme)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Allocation concealment (selection bias): Selection bias (biased allocation to interventions) due to inadequate concealment of allocations prior to assignment Low Sealed envelopes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Blinding of participants (performance bias): Performance bias due to knowledge of the allocated interventions by participants during the study High
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Blinding of personnel/ care providers (performance bias): Performance bias due to knowledge of the allocated interventions by personnel/care providers during the study. High
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Blinding of outcome assessor (detection bias): Detection bias due to knowledge of the allocated interventions by outcome assessors. Unclear Not reported
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias): Attrition bias due to amount, nature or handling of incomplete outcome data Low 0% for some outcomes. <20% for others
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Selective Reporting (reporting bias): Reporting bias due to selective outcome reporting Unclear
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Quality Rating
Guideline Used Overall Rating