Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26217929›Full record

Trial reportAddictive behaviors2015

The relationship between electronic goal reminders and subsequent drug use and treatment initiation in a criminal justice setting.

Stephanie A Spohr, Faye S Taxman, Scott T Walters

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Addictive behaviors, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Interventions for female drug-using offenders.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. 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

3 authors.

Stephanie A SpohrUniversity of North Texas Health Science Center, School of Public Health, Department of Behavioral and Community Health, Fort Worth, TX, United States. Electronic address: sas0502@live.unthsc.edu.
Faye S TaxmanGeorge Mason University, Department of Criminology, Law, and Society, Fairfax, VA, United States.
Scott T WaltersUniversity of North Texas Health Science Center, School of Public Health, Department of Behavioral and Community Health, Fort Worth, TX, United States.

Funding

In-person vs. Computer Interventions to Increase Probation ComplianceR01DA029010 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCI CTR HOUSTON · PI TAXMAN, FAYE S, WALTERS, SCOTT T · 2011 to 2016
$3.1M
NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA029010NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA029010-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionOpportunities to influence behavior through the use of electronic reminders has not been examined in a criminal justice population. The purpose of this study was to assess probationer preferences for short-term goals from a web-based program and evaluate the role of voluntary electronic reminders (e.g., text messaging, email) in achieving early treatment and probation tasks.

methodsWe used data from drug-involved offenders (n=76) participating in a clinical trial of a 2-session motivational computer program. As part of the program, participants could choose to receive text or email reminders about their probation and treatment goals for the next month. Poisson regression models were utilized to evaluate goal and reminder selection in relation to the days of substance use and treatment attendance at two-month follow-up.

resultsThe most common goals were related to probation and treatment tasks, relationships, and cognitive reappraisals. Forty-five percent of probationers elected to receive electronic goal reminders at Session 1 with a slight increase at Session two (49%). Probationers who opted to receive electronic goal reminders at Session one selected significantly more goals on average (M=4.4, SD=2.1) than probationers who did not want reminders (M=3.4, SD=1.8), (t=2.41, p=.019). Reminder selection and total number of goals selected predicted days of substance use and treatment attendance at a two-month follow-up. Probationers who opted not to receive electronic reminders and those who only chose to receive reminders at one visit had more days of substance use compared to those who chose to receive reminders at both visits, 1.66 and 2.31 times respectively. Probationers who chose not to receive electronic reminders attended 56% fewer days of treatment compared to those who chose to receive reminders at both visits.

conclusionsPeople's choice of short-term goals and reminders can provide advance notification of the likelihood of substance use and treatment initiation. Probation systems might use such information to triage at-risk probationers to a higher level of service, before problems have emerged.

Indexed as

Criminal LawGoalsAdultCell PhoneCriminalsElectronic MailFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedMotivationSubstance-Related DisordersText MessagingYoung AdultCriminal justiceGoal-settingRemindersSubstance abuseTechnology

Identifiers

PMID26217929
PMCPMC4558252

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.