Trial reportJournal of substance abuse treatment2022
Volunteer Recovery Support for Adolescents: Using propensity score based methods to understand dosage effects within a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Journal of substance abuse treatment, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Narrative Review: Revised Principles and Practice Recommendations for Adolescent Substance Use Treatment and Policy.Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry · 2025Review
- Can propensity score matching replace randomized controlled trials?World journal of methodology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn a recently published randomized controlled trial (RCT) of Volunteer Recovery Support for Adolescents (VRSA), a secondary finding indicated that better adherence to planned VRSA telephone session frequency resulted in significantly higher remission rates relative to lower session adherence. However, interpretation of this dose-response relationship may have been confounded by participant characteristics such as baseline levels of substance use and mental health problems.
methodsThe present study used statistical methods designed to approximate RCTs when comparing more than two nonequivalent groups that include an assessment of the potential impact of omitted variables. Classification and Regression Tree (CRT) analysis was used to establish the cut-point between high (H) and low (L) VRSA dosage groups. Because we were interested in generalizing to youth with poor attendance, the L-VRSA group served as the reference group. Balancing weights for H-VRSA and a services as usual (SAU) control group were calculated to ensure similarity of baseline pretreatment characteristics to the reference group, and sensitivity of findings to unobserved confounding variables was assessed.
resultsFindings suggested that superior remission rates at the end of the intervention phase were the result of high adherence to planned VRSA session frequency. Recommendations to achieve high VRSA participation among a larger segment of youth and to test whether longer VRSA duration improves the stability of recovery outcomes are provided.
conclusionFew published dose-response studies have adequately controlled for selection confounds from both observed and unobserved confounding. As such, the present study aims to both assess the impact of different dosage levels of VRSA and provide a template for how to apply state-of-the-art statistical methods designed to approximate randomized controlled trials to such studies.
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.