Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24746956›Full record

Trial reportJournal of substance abuse treatment2014

Contingency management for cocaine treatment: cash vs. vouchers.

David S Festinger, Karen L Dugosh, Kimberly C Kirby, Brittany L Seymour

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of substance abuse treatment, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Psychosocial interventions for stimulant use disorder.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Contingency Management for Drug Use Disorders: Meta-Analysis and Application of Tolin's Criteria.Clinical psychology : a publication of the Division of Clinical Psychology of the American Psychological Association · 2024
    Article
  20. Contingency Management for Dually Diagnosed Inpatients with Psychosis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Article
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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

David S FestingerTreatment Research Institute, Philadelphia, PA 19106, USA; University of Pennsylvania, Department of Psychiatry, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. Electronic address: dfestinger@tresearch.org.
Karen L DugoshTreatment Research Institute, Philadelphia, PA 19106, USA.
Kimberly C KirbyTreatment Research Institute, Philadelphia, PA 19106, USA; University of Pennsylvania, Department of Psychiatry, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
Brittany L SeymourTreatment Research Institute, Philadelphia, PA 19106, USA.
University of Pennsylvania · USTemple University · USTreatment Research Institute · US

Funding

Contingency Management for Cocaine Dependence: Cash vs VouchersR01DA021621 · NIDA · TREATMENT RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI FESTINGER, DAVID S · 2007 to 2011
$2.9M
NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA021621NIDA NIH HHS R01-DA021621
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The efficacy of contingency management (CM) for treating drug abuse is well supported. The most widely used form of CM is voucher-based reinforcement therapy (VBRT), where clients receive an escalating schedule of vouchers that can be redeemed for goods and services for meeting treatment goals. Though generally rejected due to concerns about potential harms to drug using participants, research suggests that cash may be a more effective reinforcer. This three-group randomized trial compared the efficacy of cash-based reinforcement therapy (CBRT) to VBRT and a non-CM condition on cocaine abstinence and treatment attendance; and examined whether CBRT resulted in greater levels of harm than VBRT. Findings indicated that the CBRT was as effective as VBRT when compared to the non-CM condition and that it did not increase rates of drug use, cravings, or high-risk behaviors. Future research should examine potential cost savings associated with a cash-based CM approach as this could have important implications for the wider adoption of the CM model.

Indexed as

Reinforcement, PsychologyToken EconomyAdultCocaine-Related DisordersCravingFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedReinforcement ScheduleTreatment OutcomeCash-based reinforcementCocaineContingency managementSubstance abuse treatmentVoucher-based reinforcement therapy

Identifiers

PMID24746956
PMCPMC4504189
OpenAlexW1983671139

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.