CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 140Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesDigital Mental Health InterventionsSmoking Behavior and Cessation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 82 of the 82 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A review of technology-assisted self-help and minimal contact therapies for drug and alcohol abuse and smoking addiction: Is human contact necessary for therapeutic efficacy?

Open access
Newman, Michelle G., Szkodny, Lauren E., Llera, Sandra J., Przeworski, Amy·2011·Clinical Psychology Review
DOI 10.1016/j.cpr.2010.10.002
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Technology-based self-help and minimal contact therapies have been proposed as effective and low-cost interventions for addictive disorders, such as nicotine, alcohol, and drug abuse and addiction. The present article reviews the literature published before 2010 on computerized treatments for drug and alcohol abuse and dependence and smoking addiction. Treatment studies are examined by disorder as well as amount of therapist contact, ranging from self-administered therapy and predominantly self-help interventions to minimal contact therapy where the therapist is actively involved in treatment but to a lesser degree than traditional therapy and predominantly therapist-administered treatments involving regular contact with a therapist for a typical number of sessions. In the treatment of substance use and abuse it is concluded that self-administered and predominantly self-help computer-based cognitive and behavioral interventions are efficacious, but some therapist contact is important for greater and more sustained reductions in addictive behavior.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cpr.2010.10.002

Cites

82 of 82 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 80 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–140 of 140

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Newman, M. G., Szkodny, L. E., Llera, S. J., & Przeworski, A.
Affiliations
Pennsylvania State University (US)
Corresponding author
Newman, Michelle G.
ORCID
Venue
Clinical Psychology Review
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-02
Volume
31
Issue
1
Pages
178-186
ISSN
0272-7358 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.cpr.2010.10.002
OpenAlex
W1998356401
Semantic Scholar
55961dee079e409dd1d682bc3758aaf58e29eb80
Cited by
139
References
80
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 9
FWCI
0.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Clinical Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
Keywords
substance use disorders, drug abuse, alcohol abuse, tobacco dependence, nicotine dependence, self-administered therapy, therapist contact, cognitive-behavioral intervention, treatment efficacy
MeSH terms
Behavior Therapy, Gambling, Humans, Self Care, Therapy, Computer-Assisted, Behavior, Addictive, Treatment Outcome, Substance-Related Disorders

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