Advanced Search

Study Preview



Study Title and Description

Comparison of family therapy outcome with alcohol-abusing, runaway adolescents.



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

Primary Publication Information
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
TitleData
Title Comparison of family therapy outcome with alcohol-abusing, runaway adolescents.
Author Slesnick N., Prestopnik JL.
Country Department of Human Development and Family Science, The Ohio State University, 1787 Neil Ave., 135 Campbell Hall, Columbus, Ohio 43210, USA. Slesnick.5@osu.edu
Year 2009
Numbers Pubmed ID: 19522781

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


Extraction Form: Evidence Map
Arms
Number Title Description Comments
1 Fam_b home-based ecologically based family therapy (EBFT)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
2 Fam_a office-based functional family therapy (FFT)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
3 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) 12
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
17
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Total sample size (in all arms) 119
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Age distribution of enrolled population (in years) 15.1
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Substance used Alcohol
  • 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) 1.44
  • 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 ...
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |




Results & Comparisons


Results Data
Outcome: nos use days      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure Fam_b Fam_a TAU


0 months

N Analyzed 37 40 42
SD 32 30 25
Mean 43 43 38


3 months

N Analyzed 32 31 34
SD 35 18 28
Mean 33 15 25


9 months

N Analyzed 32 29 33
SD 27 30 35
Mean 21 18 32


15 months

N Analyzed 27 30 30
SD 25 24 38
Mean 12 13 33
Outcome: alcohol use days      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure Fam_b Fam_a TAU


0 months

N Analyzed 37 40 42
SD 27 24 10
Mean 27 24 17


3 months

N Analyzed 37 40 42
SD 19 11 10
Mean 9 6 9


9 months

N Analyzed 37 40 42
SD 17 9 12
Mean 7 4 7


15 months

N Analyzed 37 40 42
SD 3 9 9
Mean 1 4 7


Quality Dimensions
Dimension Value Notes Comments
Intention-to-treat-analysis: Bias due to incomplete reporting and analysis according to group allocation No Says ITT, but also "Only study participants completing all four assessments (N = 75) were included in the tests for treatment differences."
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Group similarity at baseline (selection bias): Selection bias due to dissimilarity at baseline for the most important prognostic indicators No Delinquency, not accounted for.
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Co-interventions (performance bias): Performance bias because co-interventions were different across groups Yes Same
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Compliance (performance bias): Performance bias due to inappropriate compliance with interventions across groups No High nonparticipation, unequal between interventions.
  • 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 Urn
  • 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 Not reported
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias): Attrition bias due to amount, nature or handling of incomplete outcome data Unclear Hard to determine how many had missing data
  • 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.