Advanced Search

Study Preview



Study Title and Description

Preliminary results for an adaptive family treatment for drug abuse in Hispanic youth.



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

Primary Publication Information
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
TitleData
Title Preliminary results for an adaptive family treatment for drug abuse in Hispanic youth.
Author Santisteban DA., Mena MP., McCabe BE.
Country El Centro, School of Nursing and Health Studies, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL 33124, USA. dsantist@miami.edu
Year 2011
Numbers Pubmed ID: 21639636

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


Extraction Form: Evidence Map
Arms
Number Title Description Comments
1 MI_Educ_Fam Culturally Informed and Flexible Family-Based Treatment for Adolescents
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
2 Fam traditional family therapy
  • 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) 14
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
17
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Total sample size (in all arms) 28
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Age distribution of enrolled population (in years) NA
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Substance used Cannabis
  • 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
    ) |
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 ... United States
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |




Results & Comparisons


Results Data
Outcome: nos use days      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure MI_Educ_Fam Fam


0 months

N Analyzed 12 13
Mean 11.08 5.15
SD 11.31 4.93
SE


8 months

N Analyzed 12 13
Mean 0.58 5.85
SD 1.00 9.16
SE
Outcome: YSR      Population: 122376
Time Point Measure MI_Educ_Fam Fam


0 months

N Analyzed 12 13
Mean 53.62 69.12
SD 12.82 15.33
SE


8 months

N Analyzed 12 13
Mean 47.63 59.02
SD 7.15 18.26
SE
Outcome: Family      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure MI_Educ_Fam Fam


0 months

N Analyzed 12 13
Mean 6.08 6.26
SD 2.09 1.52
SE


8 months

N Analyzed 12 13
Mean 7.45 5.89
SD 1.54 1.89
SE
Outcome: nos sxs      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure MI_Educ_Fam Fam


0 months

N Analyzed 12 13
Mean 69.19 82.56
SD 23.98 22.04
SE


8 months

N Analyzed 12 13
Mean 59.69 61.95
SD 22.23 19.48
SE
Outcome: cannabis use days      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure MI_Educ_Fam Fam


0 months

N Analyzed 12 13
Mean 7.75 4.54
SD 9.11 4.31
SE


8 months

N Analyzed 12 13
Mean 0.50 5.46
SD 0.90 9.08
SE
Outcome: cocaine use days      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure MI_Educ_Fam Fam


0 months

N Analyzed 12 13
Mean 3.33 0.62
SD 8.54 0.96
SE


8 months

N Analyzed 12 13
Mean 0.08 0.38
SD 0.29 0.96
SE
Outcome: Family      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure MI_Educ_Fam Fam


0 months

N Analyzed 12 13
Mean 7.70 7.64
SD 0.90 1.28
SE


8 months

N Analyzed 12 13
Mean 8.00 7.49
SD 1.10 1.14
SE


Quality Dimensions
Dimension Value Notes Comments
Intention-to-treat-analysis: Bias due to incomplete reporting and analysis according to group allocation No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Group similarity at baseline (selection bias): Selection bias due to dissimilarity at baseline for the most important prognostic indicators No Variables were not similar at baseline.
  • 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. Yes
  • 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. Low
  • 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.