Trial reportAddiction (Abingdon, England)2019
Effects of a federal housing voucher experiment on adolescent binge drinking: a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Addiction (Abingdon, England), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of a Randomized Controlled Trial of Housing Vouchers on Adolescent Risky Sexual Behavior Over a 15-Year Period.Archives of sexual behavior · 2024Trial
- Housing mobility protects against alcohol use for children with socioemotional health vulnerabilities: An experimental design.Alcoholism, clinical and experimental research · 2022Trial
- Do Alcohol Outlets Mediate the Effects of the Moving to Opportunity Experiment on Adolescent Excessive Drinking? A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial.Substance use & misuse · 2022Trial
- Helped into Harm: Mediation of a Housing Voucher Intervention on Mental Health and Substance Use in Boys.Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2021Trial
- The effectiveness of abstinence-based and harm reduction-based interventions in reducing problematic substance use in adults who are experiencing homelessness in high income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis: A systematic review.Campbell systematic reviews · 2024Review
- Article
- A comprehensive review of prioritised interventions to improve the health and wellbeing of persons with lived experience of homelessness.Campbell systematic reviews · 2021Review
- Analyzing Policies Through a DOHaD Lens: What Can We Learn?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsTo test how a housing voucher generating residential mobility to lower-poverty neighborhoods, compared with public housing controls, influenced adolescent binge drinking, and whether gender modified effects.
designA multi-site household-level three-arm randomized trial of a housing intervention executed 1994-98, evaluated 2001-02.
settingFive US cities: Baltimore, MD; Boston, MA; Chicago, IL; Los Angeles, CA; and New York, NY.
participantsA total of 3537 adolescents in 4248 low-income eligible families were randomized; 2829 adolescents were analyzed at the interim evaluation (1950 in treatment; 879 in the control group). Attrition bias was accounted for with a 3-in-10 oversampling of hard-to-reach participants (effective response rate: 89%).
interventionsThe Moving to Opportunity (MTO) trial randomized volunteer low-income families in public housing to receive (1) rental subsidies redeemable in neighborhoods with < 10% tract poverty plus housing counseling, (2) unrestricted Section 8 rental subsidies or (3) to remain in public housing. We pooled the subsidy ('treatment') groups because they were conceptually similar and there was no evidence of statistical differences between groups on binge drinking. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome: past month binge drinking (five or more drinks in one sitting).
findingsAdolescent binge drinking prevalence was 3.9% for treatment and 3.2% for control. The intention-to-treat (ITT) main effect of subsidy treatment (versus control) on binge drinking was non-significant, but treatment effects were different for girls and boys (treatment-gender interaction P = 0.002). MTO treatment reduced girls' binge drinking [odds ratio (OR) = 0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.24-0.96, P = 0.037], but increased boys' binge drinking (OR = 2.37, 95% CI = 1.13-4.97, P = 0.023), compared with controls. Results were similar for secondary alcohol outcomes. Instrumental variable (IV) results adjusting for treatment compliance were comparable with ITT, but larger.
conclusionsA housing subsidy treatment that enables low-income families to move from public to private housing appears to lessen girls' binge drinking but increases boys' binge drinking, compared with controls.
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.