CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 711Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchSmoking Behavior and Cessation

Comparison of extended versus brief treatments for marijuana use.

Open access
Stephens, Robert S., Roffman, Roger A., Curtin, Lisa·2000·Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
DOI 10.1037/0022-006x.68.5.898
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Adult marijuana users (N = 291) seeking treatment were randomly assigned to an extended 14-session cognitive-behavioral group treatment (relapse prevention support group; RPSG), a brief 2-session individual treatment using motivational interviewing (individualized assessment and intervention; IAI), or a 4-month delayed treatment control (DTC) condition. Results indicated that marijuana use, dependence symptoms, and negative consequences were reduced significantly in relation to pretreatment levels at 1-, 4-, 7-, 13-, and 16-month follow-ups. Participants in the RPSG and IAI treatments showed significantly and substantially greater improvement than DTC participants at the 4-month follow-up. There were no significant differences between RPSG and IAI outcomes at any follow-up. The relative efficacy of brief versus extended interventions for chronic marijuana-using adults is discussed.

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 · 10.1037/0022-006x.68.5.898

Cites

40 of 40 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?

  • Studies that report follow-up data report abstinence rates between 0% and 30% at 3-month follow-up and about half that or less at 9-to 12-month follow-up.

    “Some studies have failed to report follow-up data (Stephens et al., 2002), but those that have report abstinence rates between 0% and 30% at 3-month follow-up (e.g., Budney et al., 2000;Stephens et al., 2000) and about half that or less at 9-to 12-month follow-up (e.g., Budney et al., 2000;Copeland et al., 2001;Stephens et al., 1994Stephens et al., , 2000)).”

    From A preliminary investigation of acceptance and commitment therapy as a treatment for Marijuana dependence in adults (2007) · cites this paper as Stephens et al., 2000

    In “Marijuana outcome comparisons involving the DTC condition” (page unavailable), the paper reports 37% abstinence in each active-treatment group during the 90 days before the 4-month assessment—above the claimed 0%–30% range, though the assessment is not at exactly 3 months. In “Marijuana outcome comparisons involving only RPSG and IAI conditions” (page unavailable), it reports 26% and 28% abstinence at 13 months, not about half the earlier 37% rate or less. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • CBT produced superior effectiveness compared with MET.

    “One study reported that CBT produced superior effectiveness when compared with MET 35.”

    From Psychosocial and pharmacological interventions for the treatment of cannabis use disorder (2018) · cites this paper as [35]

    The Abstract reports no significant differences between the cognitive-behavioral group treatment (RPSG) and the brief motivational-interviewing treatment (IAI) at any follow-up. The Discussion likewise says the brief treatment was just as effective as the extended group treatment, contrary to the claimed superiority of CBT. Page numbers were not supplied for these passages. (LLM, conf=0.95)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • In controlled trials, abstinence rates immediately following treatment have generally been in the 50% to 70% range for treatments that last for 9 to 14 sessions.

    “Abstinence rates immediately following treatment have generally been in the 50% to 70% range for treatments that last for 9 to 14 sessions (e.g., Stephens et al., 1994Stephens et al., , 2000Stephens et al., , 2002)).”

    From A preliminary investigation of acceptance and commitment therapy as a treatment for Marijuana dependence in adults (2007) · cites this paper as Stephens et al., 2000

    The paper’s introductory discussion reports that approximately 65% quit by the end of an earlier controlled treatment trial. But for this paper’s own 14-session treatment, the Results report 44% abstinent in the four weeks immediately before the end-of-treatment follow-up—below the claimed 50%–70% range. Our copy provides no page numbers for these passages. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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. Fleming, M. F., Barry, K. L., Manwell, L. B., Johnson, K., & London, R. (1997). Brief physician advice for problem drinkers. Journal of the American Medical Association, 277, 1039-1045.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Stephens, R. S., Roffman, R. A., & Curtin, L.
Affiliations
Virginia Tech (US)
ORCID
Curtin, Lisa
Venue
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2000-10
Volume
68
Issue
5
Pages
898-908
ISSN
  • 0022-006X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2117
DOI
10.1037/0022-006x.68.5.898
OpenAlex
W2125763669
Cited by
711
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 69 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 31 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 27 · 2012: 31
FWCI
9.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • NC Digital Online Collection of Knowledge and Scholarship (The University of North Carolina at Greensboro) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01da003586-07)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (2 R01 DA03586-04)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
Keywords
cannabis use, cannabis use disorder, motivational interviewing, treatment efficacy
MeSH terms
Adult, Marijuana Abuse, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Psychotherapy, Brief, Psychotherapy, Group, Surveys and Questionnaires, Recurrence, Washington, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome

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