Cited by 51Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesCounseling, Therapy, and Family DynamicsOpioid Use Disorder Treatment

Analyzing components of Community Reinforcement and Family Training (CRAFT): Is treatment entry training sufficient?

Open access
Kirby, Kimberly C., Benishek, Lois A., Kerwin, MaryLouise E., Dugosh, Karen L., Carpenedo, Carolyn M., Bresani, Elena, Haugh, James A., Washio, Yukiko +1 more·2017·Psychology of Addictive Behaviors

Abstract

Community Reinforcement and Family Training (CRAFT) assists family members with a treatment-resistant loved one. The most consistent outcome of CRAFT is increased treatment entry of the identified treatment-resistant person (IP). This led us to question whether all 6 components of CRAFT are necessary. In a randomized clinical trial, 115 concerned significant others (CSOs) of an IP received 12-14 sessions of the full CRAFT intervention, 4-6 sessions focused on Treatment Entry Training (TEnT), or 12-14 sessions of Al-Anon/Nar-Anon Facilitation (ANF). We monitored treatment entry, attendance, and substance use of the IP and the CSO's mood and functioning. Data were collected at baseline and 4, 6, and 9 months after the baseline. We found significant reductions in time to treatment entry (χ(2)2 = 8.89, p = .01) and greater treatment entry rates for CRAFT (62%; odds ratio [OR] = 2.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.1-6.9) and TEnT (63%; OR = 2.9, 95% CI = 1.2-7.5) compared with ANF (37%), but CRAFT and TEnT did not differ significantly from each other (OR = 1.1, 95% CI = 0.4-2.7). No between-group differences in IP drug use were reported by CSOs, but days of drug use decreased over time for all groups (F(3, 277) = 13.47, p < .0001). Similarly, CSO mood and functioning did not differ between the 3 conditions but improved over time (p < .0001 for all significant measures). We replicated the results of previous trials demonstrating that CRAFT produces greater treatment entry rates than ANF and found similar treatment entry rates for CRAFT and TEnT. This suggests that treatment entry training is sufficient for producing the best established outcome of CRAFT. (PsycINFO Database Record

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/adb0000306

Cites

33 of 34 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?

  • Rates of IP treatment entry across recent CRAFT innovations have been highly divergent, ranging from >60% down to 12.5%.

    “Rates of IP treatment entry across these innovations have been highly divergent, ranging from the previously established levels of > 60% [21] down to 12.5% [22].”

    From Community reinforcement and family training and rates of treatment entry: a systematic review. (2020) · cites this paper as [21]

    The citation to this paper is attached to the 12.5% end of the range. Results §3.4.1 reports initial IP treatment-entry rates of 62% for CRAFT, 63% for TEnT, and 37% for ANF—not 12.5%. Results §3.4.3 separately reports a 29% transfer rate among IPs who attended brief treatment. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    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: 2

  1. Behar E Borkovec TD 2003 Between group psychotherapy outcome research Schinka JA Velicer W Comprehensive Handbook of Psychotherapy: Vol. 2. Research Methods 213 241 New York, NY Wiley
  2. Meyers RJ Smith JE Miller EJ 1998 Working through the concerned significant other: Community Reinforcement and Family Training Miller WR Heather N Treating Addictive Behaviors: Processes of Change 2 141 161 New York, NY Plenum Press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kirby, K. C., Benishek, L. A., Kerwin, M. E., Dugosh, K. L., Carpenedo, C. M., Bresani, E., Haugh, J. A., Washio, Y., & Meyers, R. J.
Affiliations
  • Treatment Research Institute (US)
  • Christiana Care Health System (US)
  • University of New Mexico (US)
Venue
Psychology of Addictive Behaviors
Published
2017-11
Volume
31
Issue
7
Pages
818-827
ISSN
  • 0893-164X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1501
OpenAlex
W2750022066
Cited by
51
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 2
FWCI
1.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychology of Addictive Behaviors (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health (R01 DA018696, P50 DA027841)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Counseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
Keywords
Community Reinforcement and Family Training, concerned significant others, family intervention, substance use, treatment attendance, intervention components
MeSH terms
Adult, Family, Family Therapy, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Reinforcement, Psychology, 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