Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27444426›Full record

Trial reportContemporary clinical trials2016

Design of the NIDA clinical trials network validation study of tobacco, alcohol, prescription medications, and substance use/misuse (TAPS) tool.

Li-Tzy Wu, Jennifer McNeely, Geetha A Subramaniam, Gaurav Sharma, Paul VanVeldhuisen, Robert P Schwartz

Erratum issuedOpen access · greenAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Contemporary clinical trials, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 36 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Financing the "Village": Establishing a Sustainable Financial System for Child Behavioral Health.Child and adolescent psychiatric clinics of North America · 2024
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. NIH Tobacco Research and the Emergence of Tobacco Regulatory Science.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Li-Tzy WuDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA; Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA; Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA; Center for Child and Family Policy, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA. Electronic address: Litzy.wu@duke.edu.
Jennifer McNeelyDepartment of Population Health, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Geetha A SubramaniamNational Institute on Drug Abuse, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Gaurav SharmaThe EMMES Corporation, Rockville, MD, USA.
Paul VanVeldhuisenThe EMMES Corporation, Rockville, MD, USA.
Robert P SchwartzFriends Research Institute, Inc., Baltimore, MD, USA.
Emmes (United States) · USDuke University · USFriends Research Institute · USNational Institute on Drug Abuse · USNew York University · US

Funding

Project-003UG1DA013035 · NIDA · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI Aimee N Campbell, Jennifer McNeely · 2015 to 2026
$130.3M
Southern Consortium Node of the Clinical Trials NetworkU10DA013727 · NIDA · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI BRADY, KATHLEEN T. · 2000 to 2015
$34.4M
Clinical Trials Network: Mid-Atlantic Integrated Care Research CollaborativeUG1DA013034 · NIDA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI SCHWARTZ, ROBERT P, STITZER, MAXINE L · 2015 to 2019
$11.0M
Project-003UG1DA040317 · NIDA · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI WU, LI-TZY · 2015 to 2019
$9.0M
Substance Abuse & Treatment Gaps in Asians, Pacific Islanders & Multiple-race IndR01MD007658 · NIMHD · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI WU, LI-TZY · 2013 to 2017
$1.8M
MDMA and Other Hallucinogen Use: Onset and Abuse/DependenceR01DA019623 · NIDA · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI WU, LI-TZY · 2007 to 2013
$1.1M
Classification of Substance Use Severity and Treatment Outcomes: NIDA CTN StudiesR33DA027503 · NIDA · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI WU, LI-TZY · 2010 to 2012
$1.1M
NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA019623NIDA NIH HHS R33 DA027503NIDA NIH HHS U10 DA013727NIDA NIH HHS UG1 DA013034NIDA NIH HHS UG1 DA013035NIDA NIH HHS UG1 DA040317NIMHD NIH HHS R01 MD007658
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSubstance use and its associated use disorders are under-detected and under-treated in primary care. There is a need for a clinically useful brief screening and assessment instrument to identify primary care patients with substance use, sub-threshold substance use disorder (SUD), and SUD to facilitate brief intervention and treatment.

methodsWe describe the design of the recently completed National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network's tobacco, alcohol, prescription medications, and substance use/misuse screen and brief assessment tool validation study. Study aims included to: develop a 2-stage screening and brief assessment tool (TAPS Tool) to detect substance use, problem use, and SUD among adult primary care patients; examine the validity of both the screen component and the TAPS Tool by comparing them to reference standard screening and assessment measures of no use, problem use, and SUD; and determine the feasibility and acceptability of the self-administration and interviewer-administration of the tool. The design included a pilot testing phase (n=30) and the main study of 2000 adult primary care participants who were randomly assigned in counter-balanced order to have the interviewer-administration or the self-administration of the TAPS Tool followed by the other administration format. Participants' views of feasibility, acceptability and preference for format of self-administration versus interviewer-administration of the TAPS Tool were assessed. Criterion measures of use and DSM-5 SUDs were administered. DISCUSSION: The TAPS Tool study builds on prior work to develop a 2-stage clinical tool for facilitating the adoption of screening, brief assessment and treatment for SUDs in primary care.

Indexed as

Research DesignAlcoholismFemaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningNational Institute on Drug Abuse (U.S.)Opioid-Related DisordersPilot ProjectsPrimary Health CareRandom AllocationReproducibility of ResultsSubstance-Related DisordersTobacco Use DisorderUnited StatesInstrumentScreeningSubstance use disorderToolValidation

Identifiers

PMID27444426
PMCPMC5035619
OpenAlexW2484950296

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.