Advanced Search

Study Preview



Study Title and Description

Integrated family and cognitive-behavioral therapy for adolescent substance abusers: a stage I efficacy study.



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

Primary Publication Information
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
TitleData
Title Integrated family and cognitive-behavioral therapy for adolescent substance abusers: a stage I efficacy study.
Author Latimer WW., Winters KC., D'Zurilla T., Nichols M.
Country Department of Mental Health, Bloomberg School of Public Health, The Johns Hopkins University, 624 N. Broadway, 850 Hampton House, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA. wlatimer@jhsph.edu
Year 2003
Numbers Pubmed ID: 12957348

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


Extraction Form: Evidence Map
Arms
Number Title Description Comments
1 CBT_Fam Integrated Family and Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (IFCBT)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
2 Educ Drugs Harm Psychoeducation curriculum (DHPE).
  • 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
    ) |
Ages eligible (in years) 12
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
18
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Total sample size (in all arms) 135
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Age distribution of enrolled population (in years) NA
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Substance used Alcohol
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Cannabis
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Interventions studied? 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
    ) |
Other ... changes in targeted psychosocial risk and protective factors, levels of rational problem solving and learning strategy skills, scores on communication, involvement, control, values/norms indices
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Age variation of enrolled population (in years) NA
  • 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 ... Country(ies) name(s) Unclear ... Canada
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |




Results & Comparisons


Results Data
Outcome: alcohol use days      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure CBT_Fam Educ


1 months

Mean 1.67 5.57
SD 2.15 8.28
N Analyzed 21 22


2.5 months

Mean 2.28 5.86
SD 3.2 7.01
N Analyzed 21 22


5 months

Mean 1.98 6.35
SD 2.86 7.53
N Analyzed 21 22


6 months

Mean 2.03 6.06
SD 2.49 7.15
N Analyzed 21 22


0 months

Mean 5.67 6.95
SD 5.4 7.69
N Analyzed 21 22
Outcome: cannabis use days      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure CBT_Fam Educ


1 months

Mean 3.76 11.95
SD 6.16 11.02
N Analyzed 21 22


2.5 months

Mean 5.83 14.38
SD 6.95 10.19
N Analyzed 21 22


5 months

Mean 6.19 14.10
SD 8.66 11.49
N Analyzed 21 22


6 months

Mean 5.67 13.83
SD 6.34 10.24
N Analyzed 21 22


0 months

Mean 15.86 16.55
SD 10.38 11.48
N Analyzed 21 22


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 Yes
  • 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 Discussed vaguely, but not reported
  • 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 Unclear
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Allocation concealment (selection bias): Selection bias (biased allocation to interventions) due to inadequate concealment of allocations prior to assignment Unclear
  • 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 NR
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias): Attrition bias due to amount, nature or handling of incomplete outcome data Low <20%
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Selective Reporting (reporting bias): Reporting bias due to selective outcome reporting
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Quality Rating
No quality rating data was found.