Cited by 295Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesBehavioral Health and InterventionsPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

Motivational interviewing, enhancement, and brief interventions over the last decade: A review of reviews of efficacy and effectiveness.

DiClemente, Carlo C., Corno, Catherine M., Graydon, Meagan M., Wiprovnick, Alicia E., Knoblach, Daniel J.·2017·Psychology of Addictive Behaviors

Abstract

Motivation is a well-established predictor of recovery for addictive behaviors. Treatments aimed at changing substance use and gambling frequently employ motivational enhancing strategies, based in the principles of Motivational Interviewing (MI). Evidence for these approaches across addictive behaviors does not always paint a clear picture. The purpose of this review was to examine existing reviews of motivational-based interventions for various substances of abuse and gambling in the last decade to gain a deeper understanding of the current evidence and implications for future research and clinical practice. Literature searches were conducted to identify review articles from January 1, 2007 to January 30, 2017 for motivational enhancing interventions for alcohol, tobacco, drugs, marijuana, cocaine, opioids, methamphetamines, and gambling. Of the 144 articles assessed we included a total of 34 review articles in our review, including 6 Cochrane reviews. This review supports use of motivationally enhancing interventions across addictive behaviors with strongest evidence supporting use in alcohol and tobacco, with brief interventions showing strong efficacy. There is strong support for MI with marijuana and some support for gambling. Insufficient evidence is available for methamphetamine or opiate use. There are important caveats. In most cases, MI is more effective than no treatment and as effective (but not necessarily more effective) than other active treatments. Findings for effectiveness of more intensive motivational interventions or combinations are mixed. Treatment fidelity assessments, limited subpopulation analyses, and differences in dose, outcomes, and protocol specification continue to pose significant problems for reviews. (PsycINFO Database Record

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/adb0000318

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 60 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
DiClemente, C. C., Corno, C. M., Graydon, M. M., Wiprovnick, A. E., & Knoblach, D. J.
Affiliations
University of Maryland, Baltimore County (US)
Venue
Psychology of Addictive Behaviors
Published
2017-12
Volume
31
Issue
8
Pages
862-887
ISSN
  • 0893-164X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1501
OpenAlex
W2772342693
Cited by
294
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 43 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 50 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 10
FWCI
15.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychology of Addictive Behaviors (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
motivational interviewing, motivation enhancement, brief intervention, addictive behavior, substance use disorders, gambling, alcohol consumption, tobacco use, cannabis, cocaine, opioids, methamphetamine, treatment efficacy, treatment effectiveness, intervention fidelity
MeSH terms
Gambling, Humans, Review Literature as Topic, Behavior, Addictive, Treatment Outcome, Substance-Related Disorders, Motivational Interviewing

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