Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25888158›Full record

Trial reportTrials2015

Combining cognitive bias modification training with motivational support in alcohol dependent outpatients: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Marilisa Boffo, Thomas Pronk, Reinout W Wiers, Stefania Mannarini

Abstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. A Systematic Review of Attention Biases in Opioid, Cannabis, Stimulant Use Disorders.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018
    Pooled it
  2. Recent Advances in Attention Bias Modification for Substance Addictions.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. The efficacy of attention bias modification therapy in cocaine use disorders.The American journal of drug and alcohol abuse · 2016
    Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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.

Marilisa BoffoDepartment of Philosophy, Sociology, Education, and Applied Psychology (FISPPA), University of Padova, via Venezia 8, 35131, Padova, Italy. m.boffo@uva.nl.
Thomas PronkDepartment of Psychology, Addiction Development and Psychopathology (ADAPT)-lab, University of Amsterdam, Weesperplein 4, 1018, XA, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. t.pronk@uva.nl.
Reinout W WiersDepartment of Psychology, Addiction Development and Psychopathology (ADAPT)-lab, University of Amsterdam, Weesperplein 4, 1018, XA, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. r.w.h.j.wiers@uva.nl.
Stefania MannariniDepartment of Philosophy, Sociology, Education, and Applied Psychology (FISPPA), University of Padova, via Venezia 8, 35131, Padova, Italy. stefania.mannarini@unipd.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAddiction research has hypothesised that automatic and reflective cognitive processes play an important role in the onset and maintenance of alcohol (ab)use, wherein automatic reactions to drug-related cues steer the drug user towards consuming before reflective processes can get over and steer towards a different behavioural response. These automatic processes include the tendency to attend and approach alcohol cues. These biases may be trained away from alcohol via computerised cognitive bias modification (CBM). The present protocol describes the design of a double-blind randomised controlled trial (RCT) testing the effectiveness of attentional bias and approach bias re-training with a 2×2 factorial design, alongside a brief motivational support (MS) program. METHODS/

designParticipants (n = 120) are adult alcohol dependent outpatients, recruited from a public health service for addiction in Italy, who have been abstinent for at least two months, and with a main diagnosis of alcohol dependence disorder. Participants are randomly assigned to one of four experimental conditions and complete 11 sessions of training after a baseline assessment. The MS takes place before each training session. Post-intervention and three-month follow-up assessments examine the change in clinical outcome variables and attentional and approach biases (measured with the Visual Probe Task and the Approach-Avoidance Task, respectively). Alcohol approach-avoidance implicit memory associations (measured with the Brief Implicit Association Test) are also evaluated at pre- and post-intervention to explore generalisation effects. Primary outcome measure is relapse rate at follow-up. Secondary outcome measures include change in cognitive biases, in alcohol-related implicit memory associations, and in the clinical variables assessed. An exploratory analysis is also planned to detect interaction effects between the CBM modules and possible moderators (interference control capacity, gender, age, number of previous detoxifications) and mediators (change in cognitive bias) of the primary outcome measure. DISCUSSION: This RCT is the first to test the effectiveness of a combined CBM intervention alongside motivational support in alcohol-dependent outpatients. The results of this study can be extremely valuable for future research in the optimisation of CBM treatment for alcohol addiction.

trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN01005959 (registration date: 24 October 2013).

Indexed as

BiasClinical ProtocolsMotivationAdultAlcoholismDouble-Blind MethodHumansOutpatientsSample Size

Identifiers

PMID25888158
PMCPMC4347655

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.