Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20936079›Full record

ArticleJournal of addiction medicine2010

Screening and brief intervention for unhealthy drug use in primary care settings: randomized clinical trials are needed.

Richard Saitz, Daniel P Alford, Judith Bernstein, Debbie M Cheng, Jeffrey Samet, Tibor Palfai

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of addiction medicine, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06628388 (Nurse-led Primary Healthcare Intervention Model in Women's Health Management in Hong Kong), which is not on this map. Cited by 65 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
65citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT06628388 naactive not recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Nurse-led Primary Healthcare Intervention Model in Women's Health Management in Hong Kong

TypeinterventionalSponsorThe University of Hong KongRan2024 to 2027Enrolled1,728ConditionsVasomotor Symptoms, Urinary Incontinence, Anxiety, Depression - Major Depressive DisorderArmsNurse-Led Risk-Based 5As Primary Healthcare Model, Minimal Intervention
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

65 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 95 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Article

5 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Richard SaitzClinical Addiction Research and Education (CARE) Unit, Section of General Internal Medicine, Boston Medical Center and Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA.
Daniel P Alford
Judith Bernstein
Debbie M Cheng
Jeffrey Samet
Tibor Palfai
Boston Medical Center · US

Funding

Efficacy/Effectiveness of Unhealthy Drug Use Screening/Brief Intervention ModelsR01DA025068 · NIDA · BOSTON MEDICAL CENTER · PI SAITZ, RICHARD · 2008 to 2012
$5.5M
NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA025068
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The efficacy of screening and brief intervention (SBI) for drug use in primary care patients is largely unknown. Because of this lack of evidence, US professional organizations do not recommend it. Yet, a strong theoretical case can be made for drug SBI. Drug use is common and associated with numerous health consequences, patients usually do not seek help for drug abuse and dependence, and SBI has proven efficacy for unhealthy alcohol use. On the other hand, the diversity of drugs of abuse and the high prevalence of abuse and dependence among those who use them raise concerns that drug SBI may have limited or no efficacy. Federal efforts to disseminate SBI for drug use are underway, and reimbursement codes to compensate clinicians for these activities have been developed. However, the discrepancies between science and policy developments underscore the need for evidence-based research regarding the efficacy of SBI for drug use. This article discusses the rationale for drug SBI and existing research on its potential to improve drug-use outcomes and makes the argument that randomized controlled trials to determine its efficacy are urgently needed to bridge the gap between research, policy, and clinical practice.

Indexed as

addictionbrief interventiondrug screeningdrug useprimary care

Identifiers

PMID20936079
PMCPMC2950314
OpenAlexW2169008012

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.