Cited by 140Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsMedication Adherence and ComplianceSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes

Predictors of attrition from behavioral medicine treatments

Davis, Mary J., Addis, Michael E.·1999·Annals of Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

Despite the efficacy of a range of behavioral medicine interventions, high rates of attrition are a persistent problem in both clinical and research settings. Appropriately, studies have begun to focus on predictors of attrition with the hope of identifying important client or treatment characteristics. This article reviews attrition predictors in outpatient behavioral medicine treatments for headache, pain, stress, and weight management. Across all areas, psychological variables and severity of symptom variables were more predictive than demographic variables. However, as 13 of the 20 studies reviewed were in the area of weight management, generalizability of the findings to other treatment areas requires further investigation. Recommendations are made for improving attrition research by (a) developing clinically valid definitions of attrition, (b) recognizing important within-group differences among those who prematurely terminate treatment, and (c) focusing on theoretically grounded psychological and treatment process variables. A working definition of attrition based on the integration of clients' and clinicians' perspectives is also provided.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf02895967

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Unless the program is engaging and useful, people may not adhere and continue the program beyond that initial first step.

    “However, unless the program is engaging and useful, people may not adhere and continue the program beyond that initial first step [“early dropout”; (Davis and Addis, 1999)].”
  • Rates of completion for behavioral medicine trials for nonveterans have been reported as ranging from 41% to 90%, 50% to 63% for psychopharmacology trials, and 63% to 100% for other randomized controlled trials.

    “Rates of completion for behavioral medicine trials for nonveterans have been reported as ranging from 41% to 90%66 and 50% to 63% for psychopharmacology67 trials and 63% to 100% for other randomized controlled trials.68”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Davis, M. J., & Addis, M. E.
Affiliations
Clark University (US)
Corresponding author
Addis, Michael E.
Venue
Annals of Behavioral Medicine
Published
1999-12
Volume
21
Issue
4
Pages
339-349
ISSN
  • 0742-5554 (ISSN-L)
  • 0883-6612
  • 1532-4796
OpenAlex
W2081379818
Cited by
139
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 11
FWCI
0.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Annals of Behavioral Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Clark Digital Commons (Clark University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Medication Adherence and Compliance
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Keywords
treatment discontinuation, predictors of attrition, outpatient care, headache, pain management, stress management, weight management, psychological factors, symptom severity, premature treatment termination
MeSH terms
Adult, Behavior Therapy, Humans, Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care, Patient Dropouts, Risk Factors, United States

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