Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34193283›Full record

ArticleAddiction science & clinical practice2021

Perceived family cohesion, social support, and quality of life in patients undergoing treatment for substance use disorders compared with patients with mental and physical disorders.

Bente Birkeland, Bente Weimand, Torleif Ruud, Darryl Maybery, John-Kåre Vederhus

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Addiction science & clinical practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

5 authors.

Bente BirkelandDepartment of Psychosocial Health, University of Agder, Grimstad, P.O. Box 422, N-4604, Kristiansand, Norway. bente.birkeland@uia.no.ORCID 0000-0002-3529-5617
Bente WeimandFaculty of Health and Social Sciences, University of South-Eastern Norway, Drammen, Norway.
Torleif RuudDivision of Mental Health Services, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway.
Darryl MayberyMonash Rural Health, Monash University, Warragul, Australia.
John-Kåre VederhusAddiction Unit, Sørlandet Hospital, Kristiansand, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeSupport from family and other social network elements can be important in helping patients to cope with practical and emotional consequences of diseases. The aim of the study was to examine perception of family and social support and quality of life (QoL) in patients undergoing treatment for substance use disorders (SUDs). We compared them with patients in treatment for mental disorders (MDs) and physical disorders (PDs).

methodsWe used data from a national multicenter study that recruited patients (N  =  518) from three treatment domains; SUD treatment units, MD treatment units, and PD treatment units (severe neurological conditions or cancer). Data on family cohesion, social support, and QoL were compared across patient groups. In addition, data on health variables was collected. We used a multiple linear regression procedure to examine how health and support variables were associated with QoL.

resultsFamily cohesion and social support in the SUD and MD groups were rated at similarly low levels, substantially lower than in the PD group. The SUD group exhibited a somewhat lower QoL than did the PD group, but their QoL was still in the near-to-normal range. In contrast, the MD group had markedly low QoL. When examining factors associated with QoL, we found that greater family cohesion and social support were positively associated with QoL. Mental distress was the strongest factor, and was negatively associated with QoL (beta - 0.15, 95% CI  =  - 0.17/- 0.14, p  <  0.001).

conclusionService providers need to be aware of the weaker networks and less regulatory family and/or social support available to patients with SUDs. Providers should focus consistently on the social networks of patients and include patients' families in treatment processes.

Indexed as

Quality of LifeSubstance-Related DisordersAdaptation, PsychologicalCooperative BehaviorHumansSocial SupportSurveys and QuestionnairesFamily cohesionNorwayQuality of lifeSocial supportSubstance use disorders

Identifiers

PMID34193283
PMCPMC8246687

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.