Advanced Search

Study Preview



Study Title and Description

Effectiveness of a brief-intervention and continuity of care in enhancing attendance for treatment by adolescent substance users.



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

Primary Publication Information
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
TitleData
Title Effectiveness of a brief-intervention and continuity of care in enhancing attendance for treatment by adolescent substance users.
Author Tait RJ., Hulse GK., Robertson SI.
Country University School of Psychiatry & Clinical Neurosciences, Nedlands, WA 6009, Australia. rjtait@cyllene.uwa.edu.au
Year 2004
Numbers Pubmed ID: 15194207

Secondary Publication Information
UI Title Author Country Year
Emergency department-based intervention with adolescent substance users: 12-month outcomes. Tait RJ., Hulse GK., Robertson SI., Sprivulis PC. School of Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, University of Western Australia, QEII Campus, Nedlands, WA 6009, Australia. rjtait@cyllene.uwa.edu.au 2005
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Adolescent substance use and hospital presentations: a record linkage assessment of 12-month outcomes. Tait RJ., Hulse GK. School of Psychiatry & Clinical Neurosciences, University of Western Australia, QE II Medical Centre, Nedlands, WA 6009, Australia. 2005
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |



Extraction Form: Evidence Map
Arms
Number Title Description Comments
1 ICM Usual hospital care + BI focused on engagement
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
2 TAU standard hospital care.
  • 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
    ) |
19
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Total sample size (in all arms) 127
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Age distribution of enrolled population (in years) 16.7
  • 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
    ) |
Age variation of enrolled population (in years) 1.8
  • 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)? Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Income level of country(ies) of origin ... Country(ies) name(s) Unclear ... Australia
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |




Results & Comparisons


Results Data
Outcome: proportion safer alcohol use      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure ICM TAU


4 months

Counts 6 10
Percentage 40 20
N Analyzed 60 67




Counts
Percentage
N Analyzed
Outcome: injecting drug use      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure ICM TAU


4 months

Counts 3 2
Percentage 50 20
N Analyzed 60 67


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 None
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Compliance (performance bias): Performance bias due to inappropriate compliance with interventions across groups Yes Brief intervention
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Timing of outcome assessments (detection bias): Detection bias because important outcomes were not measured at the same time across groups Yes Same
  • 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
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Allocation concealment (selection bias): Selection bias (biased allocation to interventions) due to inadequate concealment of allocations prior to assignment Low
  • 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
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias): Attrition bias due to amount, nature or handling of incomplete outcome data High High and unequal loss to follow-up
  • 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.