Trial reportJournal of substance abuse treatment2011
A treatment reengagement intervention for syringe exchangers.
Trial report in Journal of substance abuse treatment, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Three decades of research in substance use disorder treatment for syringe services program participants: a scoping review of the literature.Addiction science & clinical practice · 2023Article
- Problem recognition, intention to stop use, and treatment use among regular heroin injectors.Journal of substance abuse treatment · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Poor sustained treatment engagement limits the effectiveness of all modalities of substance abuse treatment. This study evaluated the efficacy of a novel treatment reengagement intervention for a subset of syringe-exchange program (SEP) participants (N = 113) that had enrolled in treatment as part of a 4-month clinical trial (M. Kidorf et al., 2009). Three reengagement conditions for participants leaving treatment were compared. Motivational referral condition (MRC) participants (n = 31) could attend group sessions that focused on renewing treatment interest. MRC plus incentive (MRC + I) participants (n = 49) could receive modest monetary incentives for attending these sessions and reenrolling in treatment. Standard referral condition participants (n = 33) could not attend groups or receive incentives. Across a 1-year observation window, almost all study participants (86%) were discharged from treatment. MRC + I participants attended more group sessions than MRC participants and were considerably more likely to reenroll in treatment than participants in the other study conditions. Reengagement strategies can further enhance the public health benefits of SEPs by increasing rates of treatment participation over time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.