Cited by 61Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesHealth Policy Implementation ScienceOpioid Use Disorder Treatment

The dissemination and implementation of contingency management for substance use disorders: A systematic review.

Open access
Oluwoye, Oladunni, Kriegel, Liat, Alcover, Karl C., McPherson, Sterling, McDonell, Michael G., Roll, John M.·2020·Psychology of Addictive Behaviors

Abstract

Contingency management is one of the most effective behavioral interventions for substance use. However, the implementation of contingency management has not been as widespread as might be expected given its efficacy. This review summarizes literature that examines the dissemination and implementation of contingency management for substance use in community (e.g., specialized substance use treatment) and clinical (e.g., primary care) settings. A systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Databases including Google Scholar, World of Knowledge, PsycINFO, and PubMed were searched. Search results yielded 100 articles and after the screening of titles and abstracts 44 were identified. Full-text articles were examined for eligibility and yielded 24 articles that were included in this review. Of the 24 articles included in the review, the majority (n = 11) focused on implementing contingency management in methadone clinics and opioid treatment programs. Training methods, implementation strategies, fidelity assessments, and attitudes toward the implementation of contingency management are discussed in greater detail. These findings highlight the importance of organizational input and ongoing supervision and consultation, and the need for additional research that is guided by theoretical frameworks and use rigorous study designs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

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/adb0000487

Cites

60 of 60 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?

  • Clinicians and other staff may initially resist contingency management because they mistakenly believe it rewards substance use and is inappropriate.

    “Clinicians and other staff may initially resist adopting CM due to misconceptions that CM is rewarding people for substance use and, thus, inappropriate.48,54”

    From The ASAM/AAAP Clinical Practice Guideline on the Management of Stimulant Use Disorder (2024) · cites this paper as [48]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) identifies limited provider understanding of CM as a barrier to implementation, supporting the general point that staff perceptions may hinder adoption. It does not say that clinicians or other staff resist CM because they believe it rewards substance use or is inappropriate. The Introduction instead describes CM as rewarding targeted behaviors such as abstinence. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Montana, Washington, and California have started state-funded pilot programs implementing contingency management.

    “Montana, Washington, and California have all begun state-funded pilot programs that implement CM.48”

    From The ASAM/AAAP Clinical Practice Guideline on the Management of Stimulant Use Disorder (2024) · cites this paper as [48]

    The Results (Study Characteristics; page unavailable) describe statewide CM implementation efforts in South Carolina and New York, but do not address state-funded pilot programs in Montana, Washington, or California. Searches for those states and for state-funded CM pilots found no passage supporting the claim. (LLM, conf=0.73)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • A recent report by the Motivational Incentives Policy Group provides unofficial 'guardrails' for using contingency management incentives in line with the OIG Final Rule.

    “A recent report by the Motivational Incentives Policy Group-a stakeholder coalition of CM experts in policy, research, and legal analysis-outlines”

    From The ASAM/AAAP Clinical Practice Guideline on the Management of Stimulant Use Disorder (2024) · cites this paper as [48]

    The Results section on Training Strategies discusses a NIDA/SAMHSA Motivational Incentives training package, not a report by the Motivational Incentives Policy Group. Searches for the group, OIG Final Rule, and legal guardrails found no passage in our copy addressing the attributed report or its guidance; page numbers were not available. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Oluwoye, O., Kriegel, L., Alcover, K. C., McPherson, S., McDonell, M. G., & Roll, J. M.
Affiliations
Washington State University Spokane (US)
Venue
Psychology of Addictive Behaviors
Published
2020-02
Volume
34
Issue
1
Pages
99-110
ISSN
  • 0893-164X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1501
OpenAlex
W2955382919
Cited by
61
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5
FWCI
3.24
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 Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (R01AA020248; R01AA020248-05S1)
  • Bristol-Myers Squibb Foundation
  • Orthopedic Specialty Institute
  • Ringful Health
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
Keywords
contingency management, substance use disorders, dissemination, implementation, methadone clinics, opioid use disorder treatment, primary care, intervention fidelity, employee training, implementation barriers
MeSH terms
Implementation Science, Attitude of Health Personnel, Behavior Therapy, Humans, Opioid-Related Disorders, Reinforcement, Psychology, Substance-Related Disorders, Information Dissemination

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