Advanced Search

Study Preview



Study Title and Description

A randomized trial of contingency management for adolescent marijuana abuse and dependence.



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

Primary Publication Information
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
TitleData
Title A randomized trial of contingency management for adolescent marijuana abuse and dependence.
Author Stanger C., Budney AJ., Kamon JL., Thostensen J.
Country University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Center for Addiction Research, 4301 West Markham St. #843, Little Rock, AR 72205, United States. cstanger@uams.edu
Year 2009
Numbers Pubmed ID: 19717250

Secondary Publication Information
UI Title Author Country Year
Initiation of abstinence in adolescents treated for marijuana use disorders. Brown PC., Budney AJ., Thostenson JD., Stanger C. University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, 4301 West Markham Street #825-A, Little Rock, AR 72205-1799, United States. pbrown4@uams.edu 2013
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
The impact of disruptive behavior disorder on substance use treatment outcome in adolescents. Ryan SR., Stanger C., Thostenson J., Whitmore JJ., Budney AJ. University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Center for Addiction Research., Little Rock, AR 72205, USA. ryansr@uthscsa.edu -- Not Found --
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |



Extraction Form: Evidence Map
Arms
Number Title Description Comments
1 CBT_MI_Fam_CM MET/CBT + abstinence CM + family management (Exp)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
2 CBT_MI_Educ_CM MET/CBT + attendance CM + parent psychoeducation (Cntrl)
  • 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
    ) |
No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Ages eligible (in years) 14
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
18
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Total sample size (in all arms) 95
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Age distribution of enrolled population (in years) 16.1
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Substance used Cannabis
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Cannabis
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Interventions studied? Behavioral
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
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
    ) |
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) 1.1
  • 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 cannabis      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure CBT_MI_Fam_CM CBT_MI_Educ_CM


0 months

Percentage 71 67
N Analyzed 36 33


3 months

Percentage 63 35
N Analyzed 36 33


6 months

Percentage 62 50
N Analyzed 36 33


9 months

Percentage 59 43
N Analyzed 36 33
Outcome: cannabis use days      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure CBT_MI_Fam_CM CBT_MI_Educ_CM


0 months

N Analyzed 33 36
Mean 15.7 11.1
SD 11 9.2


3 months

Mean 2.4 5.1
N Analyzed 28 27


6 months

Mean 3.9 5.7
N Analyzed 28 27


9 months

Mean 3.3 8.1
N Analyzed 26 28
SD


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
  • 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 Low
  • 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
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias): Attrition bias due to amount, nature or handling of incomplete outcome data High
  • 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.