Advanced Search

Study Preview



Study Title and Description

First Evaluation of a Contingency Management Intervention Addressing Adolescent Substance Use and Sexual Risk Behaviors: Risk Reduction Therapy for Adolescents.



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

Primary Publication Information
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
TitleData
Title First Evaluation of a Contingency Management Intervention Addressing Adolescent Substance Use and Sexual Risk Behaviors: Risk Reduction Therapy for Adolescents.
Author Letourneau EJ., McCart MR., Sheidow AJ., Mauro PM.
Country Family Services Research Center, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, 176 Croghan Spur Road, Suite 104, Charleston, SC, 29407, United States. Electronic address: ElizabethLetourneau@jhu.edu.
Year 2017
Numbers Pubmed ID: 27629581

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_CM Risk Reduction Therapy for Adolescents (RRTA)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
2 TAU
  • 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) 11
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
17
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Total sample size (in all arms) 114
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Age distribution of enrolled population (in years) 14.9
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Substance used Alcohol
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Cannabis
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Opioid
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Stimulant
  • 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 ... sexual risk behaviors, and protective HIV behaviors
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Age variation of enrolled population (in years) 0.14
  • 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 ... United States
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |




Results & Comparisons


Results Data
Outcome: pct abstinent for nos      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure CBT_Fam_CM TAU


0 months

N Analyzed 45 60
Percentage 4.44 8.33


6 months

N Analyzed 45 60
Percentage 83.33 89.58


12 months

N Analyzed 45 60
Percentage 86.11 62.79


Quality Dimensions
Dimension Value Notes Comments
Intention-to-treat-analysis: Bias due to incomplete reporting and analysis according to group allocation Yes ITT focused on those who completed at least 1 assessment, but in the process they only lost 2 participants, so I rated this as "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 Yes
  • 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. High Self-reported outcomes.
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias): Attrition bias due to amount, nature or handling of incomplete outcome data Low
  • 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.