ArticleAddiction (Abingdon, England)2026
Cost-effectiveness of contingency management for methamphetamine use disorder: A model-based analysis.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Preferences for Smartphone Versus In-Person Delivery of Contingency Management: A Web-Based Survey of Australians Who Use Methamphetamine.Drug and alcohol review · 2026Article
- A pilot trial of contingency management for stimulant use in a low-barrier syringe service program.Preventive medicine · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness of contingency management for methamphetamine use disorder: A model-based analysis.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsThe United States (US) is experiencing a surge in methamphetamine use. Treatment options for methamphetamine use disorder (MethUD) focus on behavior change, particularly via contingency management (CM), where individuals receive rewards for submitting drug-free urine samples or for other positive behaviors such as attending treatment sessions. Little is known about the cost-effectiveness of CM for treating MethUD, including the January 2025 decision by the US federal government to increase the maximum annual CM incentive ten-fold to $750 per patient. This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of CM for individuals with MethUD in the US. DESIGN, SETTING AND
participantsWe developed a microsimulation model of methamphetamine use behavior among individuals with MethUD to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of CM for treating MethUD. We modeled methamphetamine use states and psychiatric and cardiovascular comorbidities. We considered a 12-week and 24-week CM program, with a maximum $750 incentive. We simulated the model in weekly time steps over the lifetime of a cohort of 10 000 individuals with MethUD, under the status quo (no treatment) and with the CM program. MEASUREMENTS: Number of deaths over one year and lifetime per person healthcare costs (healthcare sector perspective) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) experienced.
findingsWith no treatment, 274 overdose deaths and 305 total deaths occurred in the cohort over 1 year. Individuals experienced 11.37 lifetime QALYs and incurred $216 320 in lifetime healthcare costs. With a 12-week CM program, an estimated 117 deaths were prevented over 1 year, with a net gain of 0.70 lifetime QALYs per person and incremental cost of $6850 compared with no treatment, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $9830/QALY gained [95% credible interval (CR) = $8100-$11 400]. With a 24-week program, 153 deaths were prevented over 1 year, with a net gain of 0.81 lifetime QALYs per person and incremental cost of $10 000, yielding an ICER of $12 312/QALY gained (95% CR = $10 400-$14 100). Even under the pessimistic assumption of no lasting behavior change after CM program completion, the programs cost less than $130 000/QALY gained. Threshold analysis suggests that at a $50 000 willingness to pay, the 24-week program would be cost-effective even if the maximum incentive were $2491.
conclusionsModelling shows that contingency management appears to be a highly cost-effective intervention for treating methamphetamine use disorder, even with conservative assumptions and a $750 incentive cap. When cost impacts in the criminal justice and child welfare systems are included, such programs are likely cost-saving.
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.