Trial reportJournal of substance abuse treatment2017
Contingency Management Abstinence Incentives: Cost and Implications for Treatment Tailoring.
Trial report in Journal of substance abuse treatment, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Blending Face-to-Face and Internet-Based Interventions for the Treatment of Mental Disorders in Adults: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2017Pooled it
- Testing adaptations to contingency management for alcohol use disorders: A randomized controlled trial.Journal of consulting and clinical psychology · 2025Trial
- Safety and efficacy of a prescription digital therapeutic as an adjunct to buprenorphine for treatment of opioid use disorder.Current medical research and opinion · 2021Trial
- Evolution of the substance use landscape: Implications for contingency management.Journal of applied behavior analysis · 2025Review
- Rewarding recovery: the time is now for contingency management for opioid use disorder.Annals of medicine · 2022Article
- What are the ethical implications of using prize-based contingency management in substance use? A scoping review.Harm reduction journal · 2021Article
- Considerations for Implementing Contingency Management in Substance Abuse Treatment Clinics: The Veterans Affairs Initiative as a Model.Perspectives on behavior science · 2019Article
- Using a randomized controlled trial to test whether modifications to contingency management improve outcomes for heavy drinkers with serious mental illness.Contemporary clinical trials · 2018Article
- Contingency Management: New Directions and Remaining Challenges for An Evidence-Based Intervention.Journal of substance abuse treatment · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo examine prize-earning costs of contingency management (CM) incentives in relation to participants' pre-study enrollment drug use status (baseline (BL) positive vs. BL negative) and relate these to previously reported patterns of intervention effectiveness.
methodsParticipants were 255 substance users entering outpatient treatment who received the therapeutic educational system (TES), in addition to usual care counseling. TES included a CM component such that participants could earn up to $600 in prizes on average over 12-weeks for providing drug negative urines and completing web-based cognitive behavior therapy modules. We examined distribution of prize draws and value of prizes earned for subgroups that were abstinent (BL negative; N=136) or not (BL positive; N=119) at study entry based on urine toxicology and breath alcohol screen.
resultsDistribution of draws earned (median=119 vs. 17; p<.0001) and prizes redeemed (median=54 vs. 9; p<.001) for drug abstinence differed significantly for BL negative compared to BL positive participants. BL negative earned on average twice as much in prizes as BL positive participants ($245 vs. $125). Median value of prizes earned was 5.4 times greater for BL negative compared to BL positive participants ($237 vs. $44; p<.001).
conclusionsTwo-thirds of expenditures in an abstinence incentive program were paid to BL negative participants. These individuals had high rates of drug abstinence during treatment and did not show improved abstinence outcomes with TES versus usual care (Campbell et al., 2014). Effectiveness of the abstinence-focused CM intervention included in TES may be enhanced by tailoring delivery based on patients' drug use status at treatment entry.
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.