Advanced Search

Study Preview



Study Title and Description

Treating adolescent drug abuse: a comparison of family systems therapy, group therapy, and family drug education



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

Primary Publication Information
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
TitleData
Title Treating adolescent drug abuse: a comparison of family systems therapy, group therapy, and family drug education
Author Joanning
Country
Year 1992
Numbers Pubmed ID: CN-00631575

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


Extraction Form: Evidence Map
Arms
Number Title Description Comments
1 Fam_a Family drug education
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
2 PeerGroup Adolescent group therapy
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
3 Fam_b Family systems 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) 11
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
20
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Total sample size (in all arms) 134
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Age distribution of enrolled population (in years) 15.4
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Substance used SUD (not further described, except maybe excluding nicotine)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Interventions studied? Behavioral
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Outcome? Objective measurement of use/abstinence and/or intensity
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Age variation of enrolled population (in years) 1.86
  • 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 Fam_a PeerGroup Fam_b


3 weeks

N Analyzed 29 25 35
Counts 8 4 19


0 weeks

N Analyzed 29 25 35
Counts 0 0 0


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 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 But only because noncompliant were dropped
  • 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 1. Family members of those in AGT arm were substantially less willing to participate (or have children participate) than other groups. 2. Drug use estimates relied largely on adult perceptions of overall youth behavior.
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Random sequence generation (selection bias): Selection bias (biased allocation to interventions) due to inadequate generation of a randomized sequence High Randomization with replacement, disproportionately to the AGT group due to dropouts
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Allocation concealment (selection bias): Selection bias (biased allocation to interventions) due to inadequate concealment of allocations prior to assignment High
  • 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 Replaced unbalanced dropouts
  • 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.