Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 572

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Controlled Trial of Buprenorphine Treatment for Opioid Dependence

Johnson, Rolley E.·1992·JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of buprenorphine for short-term maintenance/detoxification. DESIGN: A randomized, double-blind, parallel group study comparing buprenorphine, 8 mg/d, methadone, 60 mg/d, and methadone, 20 mg/d, in a 17-week maintenance phase followed by an 8-week detoxification phase. SETTING: Outpatient facilities at the Addiction Research Center, Baltimore, Md. PATIENTS: One hundred sixty-two volunteers seeking treatment for opioid dependence. INTERVENTION: In addition to the medication, counseling using a relapse prevention model was offered but not required. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Retention time in treatment, urine samples negative for opioids, and failure to maintain abstinence. RESULTS: Throughout the maintenance phase, retention rates were significantly greater for buprenorphine (42%) than for methadone, 20 mg/d (20%, P less than .04); the percentage of urine samples negative for opioids was significantly greater for buprenorphine (53%, P less than .001) and methadone, 60 mg/d (44%, P less than .04), than for methadone, 20 mg/d (29%). Failure to maintain abstinence during the maintenance phase was significantly greater for methadone, 20 mg/d, than for buprenorphine (P less than .03). During the detoxification phase, no differences were observed between groups with respect to urine samples negative for opioids. For the entire 25 weeks, retention rates for buprenorphine (30%, P less than .01) and methadone, 60 mg/d (20%, P less than .05), were significantly greater than for methadone, 20 mg/d (6%). All treatments were well tolerated, with similar profiles of self-reported adverse effects. The percentages of patients who received counseling did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Buprenorphine was as effective as methadone, 60 mg/d, and both were superior to methadone, 20 mg/d, in reducing illicit opioid use and maintaining patients in treatment for 25 weeks.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.1992.03480200058024

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 32 references

Cited by

See all 572

Metadata

Authors
Johnson, R. E.
Venue
JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association
Published
1992-05-27
Volume
267
Issue
20
Pages
2750
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W1979184030
Cited by
572
References
32
FWCI
24.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Controlled Trial of Buprenorphine Treatment for Opioid Dependence. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.1992.03480200058024
The paper
Johnson, R. E. (1992). A Controlled Trial of Buprenorphine Treatment for Opioid Dependence. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1992.03480200058024

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.