ArticlePreventive medicine2026
A pilot trial of contingency management for stimulant use in a low-barrier syringe service program.
Article in Preventive medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo pilot test the efficacy of contingency management (CM) for stimulant use disorder (StimUD) among syringe service program (SSP) recipients.
methodsThis randomized, parallel-groups, 12-week pilot trial was conducted in Burlington, Vermont from 02/24-07/24. Twenty-seven individuals with StimUD participating in SSP services were randomized to health education (HE) plus CM for session attendance (HE+Att-CM) (n = 13) or HE plus CM for stimulant abstinence (HE+Abs-CM) (n = 14). Stimulant use monitoring was examined twice-weekly using point-of-care urine drug tests (UDTs). HE+Att-CM participants earned incentives for UDT samples independent of results. HE+Abs-CM participants earned incentives for stimulant-negative UDT samples. The primary outcome was the percentage of participants stimulant-negative by week. Missing UDTs were treated as stimulant positive. Outcomes were compared between conditions using repeated measures mixed models for categorical data based on generalized estimating equations using a logistic link function.
resultsThe percentage of participants stimulant-negative was greater in the HE+Abs-CM condition averaging 22.6% (weekly range, 7.1%-28.6%) compared to 3.2% (weekly range, 0%-7.7%) in the HE+Att-CM condition (p = .014).
conclusionsFindings provide preliminary experimental evidence that CM reduces stimulant use among individuals participating in low-barrier services at a community-based SSP.
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.