Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26562602›Full record

Trial reportJournal of studies on alcohol and drugs2015

Predictors of Abstinence From Heavy Drinking During Follow-Up in COMBINE.

Ralitza Gueorguieva, Ran Wu, Lisa M Fucito, Stephanie S O'Malley

Open access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Ralitza GueorguievaDepartment of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut.
Ran WuDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Lisa M FucitoDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Stephanie S O'MalleyDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Yale University · US

Funding

Translational Technologies CoreP50AA012870 · NIAAA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI Matthew J Girgenti · 2001 to 2026
$43.7M
Improving Alcoholism TreatmentK05AA014715 · NIAAA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI O'MALLEY, STEPHANIE S · 2004 to 2013
$2.1M
Trajectories of Drinking and Compliance in the COMBINE StudyR01AA017173 · NIAAA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI GUEORGUIEVA, RALITZA, O'MALLEY, STEPHANIE S · 2008 to 2013
$981k
New Approaches to Smoking Cessation in Heavy DrinkersK23AA020000 · NIAAA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI FUCITO, LISA M · 2011 to 2016
$755k
NIAAA NIH HHS K05 AA014715NIAAA NIH HHS K23 AA020000NIAAA NIH HHS P50 AA012870NIAAA NIH HHS R01 AA017173
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAlthough the primary focus of clinical trials is on between-group comparisons during treatment, these studies can also yield insights into which patient characteristics predict longer term outcomes. Our goal was to identify predictors of good outcome during the 1-year follow-up in the Combined Pharmacotherapies and Behavioral Interventions for Alcohol Dependence (COMBINE) Study.

methodWe constructed classification trees and a deterministic forest to predict no heavy drinking days during the last 8 weeks of the 1-year follow-up in COMBINE, based on more than 100 baseline predictors and drinking outcomes during the treatment phase of the study. The COMBINE sample was randomly split into a training and a validation data set. Logistic regression models were fit to compare the predictive performance of tree-based methods and classical methods.

resultsA small tree with only two splits and four nodes based on abstinence and good clinical outcome during treatment had fair classification accuracy in the training and the validation samples: area under the curve (AUC) of 71% and 70%, respectively. Drinking outcomes during treatment were the strongest predictors in the deterministic forest. Logistic regression analyses based on four main effects (good clinical outcome, level of drinking during treatment, age at onset of alcohol dependence, and feeling more energetic) had slightly better classification accuracy (AUC = 74%).

conclusionsEnd-of-treatment outcomes were the strongest predictors of long-term outcome in all analyses. The results emphasize the importance of optimizing outcomes during treatment and identify potential subgroups of individuals who require additional or alternative interventions to achieve good long-term outcome.

Indexed as

Alcohol DrinkingAlcoholismBehavior TherapyFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansLogistic ModelsMaleTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID26562602
PMCPMC4712662
OpenAlexW2193905276

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.