ArticleAddiction (Abingdon, England)2026
The Polysubstance Assessment Tool: Reliability, acceptability and feasibility of a novel measure of polysubstance use.
Article in Addiction (Abingdon, England), 2026. 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.
- The Polysubstance Assessment Tool: Reliability, acceptability and feasibility of a novel measure of polysubstance use.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2026Article
- Refining a Novel Measure of Polysubstance Use: Applying the Cognitive Interview Method with People Who Use Drugs.Substance use & misuse · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsThere are currently no brief quantitative assessments that capture the drug patterns of people who engage in use of more than one drug on the same day or simultaneously. The current study examined the retest reliability, acceptability and feasibility of a new quantitative assessment to measure polysubstance use.
designA tool for assessing simultaneous and same-day polysubstance behaviors, the polysubstance assessment tool (PAT) was developed in interviewer-administered and electronic self-administered formats. Participants were allocated 1:1 to receive either version of the PAT and returned one to three days later to repeat the assessment.
settingNew York City, New York, USA.
participantsAdults (18 + years, n = 115) who reported use of more than one drug per day in the last 30 days. MEASUREMENTS: Test-retest reliability estimates for dichotomous items were assessed using Cohen's kappa, Gwet's Agreement Coefficient 1 (AC1) and percent agreement. Continuous items were assessed with two-way mixed effects intraclass correlations. Bivariate analyses examined acceptability using nine Likert-type survey questions. Feasibility was examined via time to completion.
findingsOverall reliability was moderate to excellent [Gwet's AC1 range 0.70-0.96; intraclass correlation (ICC) range 0.62-0.88]. Reliability was higher for simultaneous polysubstance use (Gwet's AC1 = 0.90) as compared with same-day (Gwet's AC1 = 0.70). Acceptability was high, with no statistically significant difference between the self- and interviewer-administered versions of the tool. Median time to completion was 7 minutes, and was statistically significantly lower for the self-administered tool (median = 5 minutes) compared with the interviewer-administered version (median = 8 minutes) (P < 0.001).
conclusionsA new polysubstance assessment tool appears to have good reliability and can be considered by researchers seeking a quantitative measure of polysubstance use behaviors given its simplicity, high acceptability and quick completion time.
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.