CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 370Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsAlcohol Consumption and Health Effects

Patient predictors of alcohol treatment outcome: A systematic review

Open access
Adamson, Simon J., Sellman, John Douglas, Frampton, Chris M.A.·2009·Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment
DOI 10.1016/j.jsat.2008.05.007
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Patient characteristics as predictors of alcohol use disorder treatment outcome were examined on three levels, identifying whether or not variables were significant predictors of drinking-related outcome in univariate analysis, in multivariate analysis, and in multivariate analyses limited to studies including several "key predictors." Also, a model was developed to predict total percentage of variance in treatment outcome accounted for in each study using each of the key predictors and a range of methodological factors. The most consistent univariate predictors were baseline alcohol consumption, dependence severity, employment, gender, psychopathology rating, treatment history, neuropsychological functioning, alcohol-related self-efficacy, motivation, socioeconomic status/income, treatment goal, and religion. When these key predictors were combined into multivariate analyses, baseline alcohol consumption and gender showed substantial reductions in predictive consistency whereas the remaining variables were not greatly affected. The most consistent predictors overall were dependence severity, psychopathology ratings, alcohol-related self-efficacy, motivation, and treatment goal. The two predictor variables most associated with greater variance accounted for in predictive models, when controlling for broader methodological variables, were baseline alcohol consumption and dependence severity. Few predictor variables were examined in more than a third of studies reviewed, and few variables were found to be significant predictors in a clear majority of studies. However, a subset of variables was identified, which collectively could be considered to represent a consistent set of predictors. Too few studies controlled for other important predictor variables. Attempts to synthesize findings were often hampered by lack of agreement of the best measure for predictor variables.

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 · 10.1016/j.jsat.2008.05.007

Cites

95 of 95 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Identification of client characteristics predictive of successful treatment outcomes can potentially improve efficacy by tailoring interventions to meet individual needs.

    “The identification of client characteristics that are predictive of successful treatment outcomes can potentially improve the efficacy of treatment by tailoring interventions to meet individual needs (Adamson, Sellman, & Frampton, 2009;Barnicot et al., 2012;Daughters, Lejuez, Lesieur, Strong, & Zvolensky, 2003).”

    From Predictors of outcomes of psychological treatments for disordered gambling: A systematic review (2016) · cites this paper as Adamson et al., 2009

  • A better understanding of variables that predict successful treatment outcomes would allow for more accurate prognoses.

    “A better understanding of the variables that predict successful treatment outcomes would also allow for more accurate prognoses (Adamson et al., 2009).”

    From Predictors of outcomes of psychological treatments for disordered gambling: A systematic review (2016) · cites this paper as Adamson et al., 2009

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. McMahon, J., & Jones, B. T. (1993). The Negative Alcohol Expectancy Questionnaire. Journal of the Association of Nurses in Substance Abuse, 12, 17.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Adamson, S. J., Sellman, J. D., & Frampton, C. M. A.
Affiliations
University of Otago (NZ)
Corresponding author
Adamson, Simon J.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-01
Volume
36
Issue
1
Pages
75-86
ISSN
0740-5472 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jsat.2008.05.007
OpenAlex
W2011221954
Cited by
370
References
91
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 30 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 35 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 18
FWCI
1.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Alcohol Consumption and Health Effects
Keywords
alcoholism, alcohol treatment outcomes, predictors of treatment outcome, dependence severity, motivation, psychopathology, gender differences, treatment goals
MeSH terms
Alcohol Drinking, Alcoholism, Female, Forecasting, Humans, Male, Motivation, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Severity of Illness Index, Sex Factors, Social Class, Models, Statistical, Multivariate Analysis, Treatment Outcome, Self Efficacy

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