Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34034690›Full record

Trial reportBMC public health2021

ADVANCE integrated group intervention to address both substance use and intimate partner abuse perpetration by men in substance use treatment: a feasibility randomised controlled trial.

Gail Gilchrist, Laura Potts, Polly Radcliffe, Gemma Halliwell, Sandi Dheensa, Juliet Henderson, Amy Johnson, Beverly Love, Elizabeth Gilchrist, Gene Feder and 8 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.8field-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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. 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

18 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Gail GilchristNational Addiction Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, 4 Windsor Walk, London, SE5 8BB, UK. gail.gilchrist@kcl.ac.uk.
Laura PottsDepartment of Biostatistics and Health Informatics, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AF, UK.
Polly RadcliffeNational Addiction Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, 4 Windsor Walk, London, SE5 8BB, UK.
Gemma HalliwellCentre for Academic Primary Care, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK.
Sandi DheensaCentre for Academic Primary Care, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK.
Juliet HendersonNational Addiction Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, 4 Windsor Walk, London, SE5 8BB, UK.
Amy JohnsonSchool of Health in Social Science, University of Edinburgh, 8-9 Hope Park Square, Edinburgh, 8HQ 9NW, UK.
Beverly LoveNational Addiction Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, 4 Windsor Walk, London, SE5 8BB, UK.
Elizabeth GilchristSchool of Health in Social Science, University of Edinburgh, 8-9 Hope Park Square, Edinburgh, 8HQ 9NW, UK.
Gene FederCentre for Academic Primary Care, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK.
Steve ParrottDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, Seebohm Rowntree Building, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, UK.
Jinshuo LiDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, Seebohm Rowntree Building, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, UK.
Mary McMurranIndependent Consulting Psychologist, Lancaster, UK.
Sara KirkpatrickRESPECT, The Green House, 244-254 Cambridge Heath Road, London, E2 9DA, UK.
Danielle Stephens-LewisPsychological Sciences, University of Gloucestershire, The Park, Cheltenham, GL50 2RH, UK.
Caroline EastonRochester Institute of Technology, 153 Lomb Memorial Drive, Rochester, NY, 14623, USA.
Cassandra BerbaryRochester Institute of Technology, 153 Lomb Memorial Drive, Rochester, NY, 14623, USA.
Sabine LandauDepartment of Biostatistics and Health Informatics, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AF, UK.
King's College London · GBUniversity of Bristol · GBRochester Institute of Technology · USUniversity of Edinburgh · GBUniversity of York · GBUniversity of Gloucestershire · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSubstance use is a risk factor for intimate partner abuse (IPA) perpetration. Delivering perpetrator interventions concurrently with substance use treatment shows promise.

methodsThe feasibility of conducting an efficacy and cost-effectiveness trial of the ADVANCE 16-week intervention to reduce IPA by men in substance use treatment was explored. A multicentre, parallel group individually randomised controlled feasibility trial and formative evaluation was conducted. Over three temporal cycles, 104 men who had perpetrated IPA towards a female (ex) partner in the past year were randomly allocated to receive the ADVANCE intervention + substance use treatment as usual (TAU) (n = 54) or TAU only (n = 50) and assessed 16-weeks post-randomisation. Participants' (ex) partners were offered support and 27 provided outcome data. Thirty-one staff and 12 men who attended the intervention participated in focus groups or interviews that were analysed using the framework approach. Pre-specified criteria assessed the feasibility of progression to a definitive trial: 1) ≥ 60% of eligible male participants recruited; 2) intervention acceptable to staff and male participants; 3) ≥ 70% of participants followed-up and 4) levels of substance use and 5) IPA perpetrated by men in the intervention arm did not increase from average baseline level at 16-weeks post-randomisation.

results70.7% (104/147) of eligible men were recruited. The formative evaluation confirmed the intervention's acceptability. Therapeutic alliance and session satisfaction were rated highly. The overall median rate of intervention session attendance (of 14 compulsory sessions) was 28.6% (range 14.3-64.3% by the third cycle). 49.0% (51/104) of men and 63.0% (17/27) of their (ex) partners were followed-up 16-weeks post-randomisation. This increased to 100% of men and women by cycle three. At follow-up, neither substance use nor IPA perpetration had worsened for men in the intervention arm.

conclusionsIt was feasible to deliver the ADVANCE intervention in substance use treatment services, although it proved difficult to collect data from female (ex)partners. While some progression criteria were met, others were not, although improvements were demonstrated by the third cycle. Lessons learned will be implemented into the study design for a definitive trial of the ADVANCE intervention.

trial registrationISRCTN79435190 prospectively registered 22nd May 2018.

Indexed as

Intimate Partner ViolenceSubstance-Related DisordersCost-Benefit AnalysisFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMaleAcceptabilityFeasibility trialFormative evaluationGroup interventionIntimate partner abuseSubstance abuse treatment

Identifiers

PMID34034690
PMCPMC8147906
OpenAlexW3163984626

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.