Cited by 173Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesPosttraumatic Stress Disorder Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 58 of the 61 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 53 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Mindfulness-Oriented Recovery Enhancement versus CBT for co-occurring substance dependence, traumatic stress, and psychiatric disorders: Proximal outcomes from a pragmatic randomized trial

Open access
Garland, Eric L., Roberts-Lewis, Amelia, Tronnier, Christine D., Graves, Rebecca, Kelley, Karen·2016·Behaviour Research and Therapy

Abstract

In many clinical settings, there is a high comorbidity between substance use disorders, psychiatric disorders, and traumatic stress. Novel therapies are needed to address these co-occurring issues efficiently. The aim of the present study was to conduct a pragmatic randomized controlled trial comparing Mindfulness-Oriented Recovery Enhancement (MORE) to group Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (CBT) and treatment-as-usual (TAU) for previously homeless men residing in a therapeutic community. Men with co-occurring substance use and psychiatric disorders, as well as extensive trauma histories, were randomly assigned to 10 weeks of group treatment with MORE (n = 64), CBT (n = 64), or TAU (n = 52). Study findings indicated that from pre-to post-treatment MORE was associated with modest yet significantly greater improvements in substance craving, post-traumatic stress, and negative affect than CBT, and greater improvements in post-traumatic stress and positive affect than TAU. A significant indirect effect of MORE on decreasing craving and post-traumatic stress by increasing dispositional mindfulness was observed, suggesting that MORE may target these issues via enhancing mindful awareness in everyday life. This pragmatic trial represents the first head-to-head comparison of MORE against an empirically-supported treatment for co-occurring disorders. Results suggest that MORE, as an integrative therapy designed to bolster self-regulatory capacity, may hold promise as a treatment for intersecting clinical conditions.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.brat.2015.11.012

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 53 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 75 claims

  • Probably not a substantial claim. 38
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 29
55 of 55
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Few integrated, empirically-supported treatment options for co-occurring disorders are available, and even fewer have been tested in randomized controlled trials with homeless individuals.

    “Despite the prevalence and consequences of COD, few integrated, empirically-supported treatment options are available, and even fewer have been tested as interventions for homeless individuals in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    This pragmatic trial is the first head-to-head comparison of MORE against CBT for co-occurring psychiatric and substance use disorders.

    “This pragmatic trial represents the first head-to-head comparison of MORE against CBT for co-occurring psychiatric and substance use disorders.”
2 of 2

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 cited randomized trial is described as quasi-experimental

    Minor

    The text groups Kearney et al. among quasi-experimental studies, but the cited reference identifies it as a randomized controlled pilot study.

1 of 1

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 61 references

3 of the 61 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–173 of 173

Metadata

Authors
Garland, E. L., Roberts-Lewis, A., Tronnier, C. D., Graves, R., & Kelley, K.
Affiliations
  • University of Utah (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • Smith College (US)
  • Triangle (US)
Corresponding author
Garland, Eric L.
Venue
Behaviour Research and Therapy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-02
Volume
77
Pages
7-16
ISSN
0005-7967 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2174697612
Cited by
173
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 4
FWCI
16.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
erratum (2018-01-01)
Open access
Locations
  • Behaviour Research and Therapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
  • UNC Libraries
Funders
  • Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) (TI 020489, R34DA037005)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
Keywords
Mindfulness-Oriented Recovery Enhancement, cognitive behavioral therapy, co-occurring substance use disorders, mental illness, traumatic stress, post-traumatic stress, drug craving, trait mindfulness, homeless men, therapeutic communities, group therapy, self-regulation, negative affect, positive affect
MeSH terms
Adult, Awareness, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychotherapy, Group, Comorbidity, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome, Substance-Related Disorders, Stress Disorders, Traumatic, Mindfulness

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 2026-10-05, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-05 (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