Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 401

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 56 of the 56 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The National Treatment Outcome Research Study (NTORS): 4–5 year follow‐up results

Gossop, Michael, Marsden, John, Stewart, Duncan, Kidd, Tara·2003·Addiction

Abstract

Aims The National Treatment Outcome Research Study (NTORS) is the first prospective national study of treatment outcome among drug misusers in the United Kingdom. NTORS investigates outcomes for drug misusers treated in existing services in residential and community settings. Design, setting and participants The study used a longitudinal, prospective cohort design. Data were collected by structured interviews at intake to treatment, 1 year, 2 years and at 4–5 years. The sample comprised 418 patients from 54 agencies and four treatment modalities. Measurements Measures were taken of illicit drug use, injecting and sharing injecting equipment, alcohol use, psychological health and crime. Findings Rates of abstinence from illicit drugs increased after treatment among patients from both residential and community (methadone) programmes. Reductions were found for frequency of use of heroin, non‐prescribed methadone, benzodiazepines, injecting and sharing of injecting equipment. For most variables, reductions were evident at 1 year with outcomes remaining at about the 1 year level or with further reductions. Crack cocaine and alcohol outcomes at 4–5 years were not significantly different from intake. Conclusions Substantial reductions across a range of problem behaviours were found 4–5 years after patients were admitted to national treatment programmes delivered under day‐to‐day conditions. The less satisfactory outcomes for heavy drinking and use of crack cocaine suggest the need for services to be modified to tackle these problems more effectively. Despite differences between the United Kingdom and the United States in patient populations and in treatment programmes, there are many similarities between the two countries in outcomes from large‐scale, multi‐site studies.

Overview

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 · 10.1046/j.1360-0443.2003.00296.x

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 56 references

Cited by

See all 401

Metadata

Authors
Gossop, M., Marsden, J., Stewart, D., & Kidd, T.
Venue
Addiction
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2003-02-20
Volume
98
Issue
3
Pages
291-303
ISSN
  • 0965-2140 (ISSN-L)
  • 1360-0443
OpenAlex
W2150115621
Cited by
401
References
56
FWCI
11.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The National Treatment Outcome Research Study (NTORS): 4–5 year follow‐up results. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1360-0443.2003.00296.x
The paper
Gossop, M., Marsden, J., Stewart, D., & Kidd, T. (2003). The National Treatment Outcome Research Study (NTORS): 4–5 year follow‐up results. Addiction. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1360-0443.2003.00296.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.