Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29792052›Full record

Trial reportThe American journal of psychiatry2018

Randomized Clinical Trial of Computerized and Clinician-Delivered CBT in Comparison With Standard Outpatient Treatment for Substance Use Disorders: Primary Within-Treatment and Follow-Up Outcomes.

Brian D Kiluk, Charla Nich, Matthew B Buck, Kathleen A Devore, Tami L Frankforter, Donna M LaPaglia, Srinivas B Muvvala, Kathleen M Carroll

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The American journal of psychiatry, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

55 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. The rise and fall of substance use during treatment: Applying recency and expectancy principles to daily substance use patterns.Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors · 2023
    Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Brian D KilukFrom Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn.
Charla NichFrom Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn.
Matthew B BuckFrom Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn.
Kathleen A DevoreFrom Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn.
Tami L FrankforterFrom Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn.
Donna M LaPagliaFrom Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn.
Srinivas B MuvvalaFrom Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn.
Kathleen M CarrollFrom Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn.

Funding

TSF to enhance treatment of cocaine dependenceP50DA009241 · NIDA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI CARROLL, KATHLEEN M. · 1994 to 2018
$40.5M
Computer-Based Training in Cognitve Behavioral TherapyR01DA015969 · NIDA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI CARROLL, KATHLEEN M. · 2002 to 2015
$2.8M
Efficacy and Mechanisms of CBT4CBT for Alcohol Use DisordersR01AA024122 · NIAAA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI KILUK, BRIAN D. · 2016 to 2020
$2.7M
Computer-Based Training in Cognitve Behavioral TherapyR37DA015969 · NIDA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI CARROLL, KATHLEEN M. · 2003 to 2009
$2.6M
NIAAA NIH HHS R01 AA024122NIDA NIH HHS P50 DA009241NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA015969NIDA NIH HHS R37 DA015969
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivePrevious trials have demonstrated the efficacy and durability of computer-based cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT4CBT) as an add-on to standard outpatient care in a range of treatment-seeking populations. In this study, the authors evaluated the efficacy and safety of CBT4CBT as a virtual stand-alone treatment, delivered with minimal clinical monitoring, and clinician-delivered cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) compared with treatment as usual in a heterogeneous sample of treatment-seeking outpatients with substance use disorders.

methodThis was a randomized clinical trial in which 137 individuals who met DSM-IV-TR criteria for current substance abuse or dependence were randomly assigned to receive treatment as usual, weekly individual CBT, or CBT4CBT with brief weekly monitoring.

resultsRates of treatment exposure differed by group, with the best retention in the CBT4CBT group and the poorest in the individual CBT group. Participants who received CBT or CBT4CBT reduced their frequency of substance use significantly more than those who received treatment as usual. Six-month follow-up outcomes indicated continuing benefit of CBT4CBT (plus monitoring) over treatment as usual, but not for clinician-delivered CBT over treatment as usual. Analysis of secondary outcomes indicated that participants in the CBT4CBT group demonstrated the best learning of cognitive and behavioral concepts, as well as the highest satisfaction with treatment.

conclusionsThis first trial of computerized CBT as a virtual stand-alone intervention delivered in a clinical setting to a diverse sample of patients with current substance use disorders indicated that it was safe, effective, and durable relative to standard treatment approaches and was well-liked by participants. Clinician-delivered individual CBT, while efficacious within the treatment period, was unexpectedly associated with a higher dropout rate and lower effects at follow-up.

Indexed as

Cognitive Behavioral TherapyAdultAmbulatory CareFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleSubstance-Related DisordersTherapy, Computer-AssistedTreatment OutcomeAlcohol AbuseBehavior TherapyCognitive TherapyPsychoactive Substance Use Disorder

Identifiers

PMID29792052
PMCPMC6120780

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.