Trial reportJournal of studies on alcohol and drugs2012
Patient reactance moderates the effect of directive telephone counseling for methamphetamine users.
Trial report in Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- The ASAM/AAAP Clinical Practice Guideline on the Management of Stimulant Use Disorder.Journal of addiction medicineGuideline
- Cognitive-behavioral therapy in depressed primary care patients with co-occurring problematic alcohol use: effect of telephone-administered vs. face-to-face treatment-a secondary analysis.Journal of psychoactive drugsTrial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study examined the impact of the interaction between patient reactance and treatment directiveness on the effectiveness of telephone aftercare for methamphetamine dependence.
methodReactance was assessed at baseline, and participants were randomly assigned to directive or nondirective treatment conditions. Logistic regression tested for the significance of the interaction as a predictor of 3-month and 12-month use of methamphetamine and stimulants.
resultsA significant interaction was observed at the 3-month follow-up, in which the directive condition was less effective for patients higher in reactance and was more effective for patients lower in reactance. Among patients at a high level of reactance, the nondirective condition increased the likelihood of abstinence.
conclusionsThis study suggests that, in the context of telephone-based care, directive interventions offer short-term clinical benefit for methamphetamine users who readily accept influence from authority figures, whereas nondirective interventions offer benefit for patients who do not readily accept influence. The short-term nature of these effects indicates that there is a need for brief but ongoing telephone support to maintain treatment gains.
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.