Cited by 701Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsDigital Mental Health Interventions

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 24 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

A Smartphone Application to Support Recovery From Alcoholism: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Open access

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Patients leaving residential treatment for alcohol use disorders are not typically offered evidence-based continuing care, although research suggests that continuing care is associated with better outcomes. A smartphone-based application could provide effective continuing care. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether patients leaving residential treatment for alcohol use disorders with a smartphone application to support recovery have fewer risky drinking days than control patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: An unmasked randomized clinical trial involving 3 residential programs operated by 1 nonprofit treatment organization in the Midwestern United States and 2 residential programs operated by 1 nonprofit organization in the Northeastern United States. In total, 349 patients who met the criteria for DSM-IV alcohol dependence when they entered residential treatment were randomized to treatment as usual (n = 179) or treatment as usual plus a smartphone (n = 170) with the Addiction-Comprehensive Health Enhancement Support System (A-CHESS), an application designed to improve continuing care for alcohol use disorders. INTERVENTIONS: Treatment as usual varied across programs; none offered patients coordinated continuing care after discharge. A-CHESS provides monitoring, information, communication, and support services to patients, including ways for patients and counselors to stay in contact. The intervention and follow-up period lasted 8 and 4 months, respectively. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Risky drinking days--the number of days during which a patient's drinking in a 2-hour period exceeded 4 standard drinks for men and 3 standard drinks for women, with standard drink defined as one that contains roughly 14 g of pure alcohol (12 oz of regular beer, 5 oz of wine, or 1.5 oz of distilled spirits). Patients were asked to report their risky drinking days in the previous 30 days on surveys taken 4, 8, and 12 months after discharge from residential treatment. RESULTS: For the 8 months of the intervention and 4 months of follow-up, patients in the A-CHESS group reported significantly fewer risky drinking days than did patients in the control group, with a mean of 1.39 vs 2.75 days (mean difference, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.46-2.27; P = .003). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The findings suggest that a multifeatured smartphone application may have significant benefit to patients in continuing care for alcohol use disorders. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01003119.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2013.4642

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 24 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 17 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 24
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 17
37 of 37
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    No other large randomized trial has been reported about the effectiveness of mobile technology for continuing care of AUDs.

    “To our knowledge, no other large randomized trial has been reported about the effectiveness of mobile technology for the continuing care of AUDs.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The missing outcome data in this trial are missing at random.

    “provide unbiased estimates when data are missing at random.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The modified 8-item set derived from the SIP-R adequately captures negative consequences of drinking.

    “Because of these departures from the established instrument, the 8 items were examined individually rather than as a single scale.”
3 of 3

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

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

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • A-CHESS randomization count conflicts with the group totals

    Minor

    The results say 179 patients were assigned to A-CHESS, while the abstract assigns 179 to control and 170 to treatment.

  • Pages-viewed estimate falls outside its confidence interval

    Minor

    The reported coefficient is positive, but both confidence-interval bounds are negative.

  • Replacement reasons exceed the stated total

    Minor

    The four listed replacement counts sum to 117, rather than the stated 113.

    Reported 113 · recomputed 117

  • Mediation estimate falls outside its confidence interval

    Minor

    The reported path-b estimate is −0.969, but its interval runs from positive 1.650 to −0.289 and does not contain that estimate.

4 of 4

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 32 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [7]McLellan AT Carise D Kleber HD Can the national addiction treatment infrastructure support the public’s demand for quality care? J Subst Abuse Treat 2003 25 2 117 121 14680015

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 601–700 of 701

Metadata

Authors
Gustafson, D. H., McTavish, F. M., Chih, M.-Y., Atwood, A. K., Johnson, R. A., Boyle, M. G., Levy, M. S., Driscoll, H., Chisholm, S. M., Dillenburg, L., Isham, A., & Shah, D.
Affiliations
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • North Shore Medical Center (US)
  • Fayette Companies, Peoria, Illinois
  • North Shore Community College (US)
Corresponding author
Gustafson, David H.
Venue
JAMA Psychiatry
Published
2014-05-01
Volume
71
Issue
5
Pages
566
ISSN
2168-622X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2117046315
Cited by
692
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 49 · 2023: 57 · 2022: 66 · 2021: 69 · 2020: 63 · 2019: 62 · 2018: 81 · 2017: 52 · 2016: 49 · 2015: 50 · 2014: 24
FWCI
44.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JAMA Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (R01AA017192)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
mobile application, alcoholism, continuing care, residential treatment, recovery support, hazardous drinking, post-discharge follow-up, mobile health
MeSH terms
Adult, Aftercare, Alcoholism, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Compliance, Patient Education as Topic, Psychotherapy, Group, Software, Temperance, Therapy, Computer-Assisted, Midwestern United States, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Substance Abuse Treatment Centers, Case Management, Personal Autonomy, Cell Phone, Secondary Prevention, Motivational Interviewing

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-06, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-06 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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