Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34278041›Full record

ArticleContemporary clinical trials communications2021

Electrophysiological predictors and indicators of contingency management treatment response: Rationale and design for the ways of rewarding abstinence project (WRAP).

Sarah E Forster, Steven D Forman, Naomi N Gancz, Greg J Siegle, Michael Walsh Dickey, Stuart R Steinhauer

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Contemporary clinical trials communications, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 52% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sarah E ForsterVISN 4 Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, United States.
Steven D FormanVISN 4 Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, United States.
Naomi N GanczVISN 4 Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, United States.
Greg J SiegleUniversity of Pittsburgh, Department of Psychiatry, United States.
Michael Walsh DickeyVISN 4 Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, United States.
Stuart R SteinhauerVISN 4 Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, United States.
University of Pittsburgh · USVA Pittsburgh Healthcare System · US

Funding

Electrophysiological Predictors and Indicators of Contingency Management Treatment ResponseIK2CX001807 · VA · VETERANS HEALTH ADMINISTRATION · PI FORSTER, SARAH E · 2019 to 2024
–
CSRD VA IK2 CX001807
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundElectrophysiological measures can predict and reflect substance use treatment response. Veterans are disproportionately affected by disorders of addiction; cocaine use disorder (CUD) being particularly problematic due to high relapse rates and the absence of approved pharmacotherapies. Prize-based Contingency Management (PBCM) is an evidence-based behavioral intervention for CUD, involving incentives for cocaine abstinence but treatment response is variable. Measurement-based adaptation of PBCM has promise to improve effectiveness but remains to be usefully developed.

methodsThis trial aims to determine if individuals with distinct neurocognitive profiles differentially benefit from one of two existing versions of PBCM. CUD patients will be randomized into treatment-as-usual or 12-weeks of PBCM using either monetary or tangible prize incentives. Prior to randomization, EEG will be used to assess response to monetary versus tangible reward; EEG and cognitive-behavioral measures of working memory, cognitive control, and episodic future thinking will also be acquired. Substance use and treatment engagement will be monitored throughout the treatment interval and assessments will be repeated at post-treatment. DISCUSSION: Results of this trial may elucidate individual differences contributing to PBCM treatment response and reveal predictors of differential benefits from existing treatment variants. The design also affords the opportunity to evaluate treatment-related changes in neurocognitive functioning over the course of PBCM. Our model posits that PBCM scaffolds future-oriented goal representation and self-control to support abstinence. Individuals with poorer functioning may be less responsive to abstract monetary reward and will therefore achieve better outcomes with respect to abstinence and treatment engagement when tangible incentives are utilized.

Indexed as

Cocaine use disorderContingency managementElectroencephalographyMeasurement-based careMinimizationPrognostic factors

Identifiers

PMID34278041
PMCPMC8264114
OpenAlexW3166386796

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.