Advanced Search

Study Preview



Study Title and Description

Substance use and social stability of homeless youth: A comparison of three interventions.



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

Primary Publication Information
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
TitleData
Title Substance use and social stability of homeless youth: A comparison of three interventions.
Author Zhang J., Slesnick N.
Country Human Development and Family Studies.
Year 2018
Numbers Pubmed ID: 30556713

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


Extraction Form: Evidence Map
Arms
Number Title Description Comments
1 CBT community reinforcement approach
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
2 MI Motivational Enhancement Therapy (MET)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
3 ICM Case Management (CM)
  • 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
    ) |
20
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Total sample size (in all arms) 270
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Age distribution of enrolled population (in years) 18.74
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nr
  • 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) 1.26
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nr
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nr
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nr
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nr
  • 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 Upper income
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |




Results & Comparisons


Results Data
Outcome: nos use days      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure CBT MI ICM


0 months

N Analyzed 93 86 91
Mean 59.9 68.16 56.8
SD 38.89 36.19 34.85


3 months

N Analyzed 93 86 91
Mean 53.6 45.67 49.38
SD 40.76 43.24 40.66


6 months

N Analyzed 93 86 91
Mean 39.1 48.88 42.64
SD 38.83 41.43 40.74


12 months

N Analyzed 93 86 91
Mean 39.59 50.72 45.76
SD 39.86 41.27 39.1


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 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. 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.