Cited by 116Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesAdvanced Causal Inference TechniquesAlcohol Consumption and Health Effects

Estimating the efficacy of Alcoholics Anonymous without self-selection bias: an instrumental variables re-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Open access
Humphreys, Keith, Blodgett, Janet C., Wagner, Todd H.·2014·Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research

Abstract

Background: Observational studies of Alcoholics Anonymous' (AA) effectiveness are vulnerable to self‐selection bias because individuals choose whether or not to attend AA. The present study, therefore, employed an innovative statistical technique to derive a selection bias‐free estimate of AA's impact. Methods: Six data sets from 5 National Institutes of Health–funded randomized trials (1 with 2 independent parallel arms) of AA facilitation interventions were analyzed using instrumental variables models. Alcohol‐dependent individuals in one of the data sets (n = 774) were analyzed separately from the rest of sample (n = 1,582 individuals pooled from 5 data sets) because of heterogeneity in sample parameters. Randomization itself was used as the instrumental variable. Results: Randomization was a good instrument in both samples, effectively predicting increased AA attendance that could not be attributed to self‐selection. In 5 of the 6 data sets, which were pooled for analysis, increased AA attendance that was attributable to randomization (i.e., free of self‐selection bias) was effective at increasing days of abstinence at 3‐month (B = 0.38, p = 0.001) and 15‐month (B = 0.42, p = 0.04) follow‐up. However, in the remaining data set, in which preexisting AA attendance was much higher, further increases in AA involvement caused by the randomly assigned facilitation intervention did not affect drinking outcome. Conclusions: For most individuals seeking help for alcohol problems, increasing AA attendance leads to short‐ and long‐term decreases in alcohol consumption that cannot be attributed to self‐selection. However, for populations with high preexisting AA involvement, further increases in AA attendance may have little impact.

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 · 10.1111/acer.12557

Cites

27 of 27 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?

  • TSF programs encourage participation in self- and mutual-help organizations, which aim to reduce alcohol use via changes in the composition of one's social network, increases in abstinence self-efficacy and spirituality, and reductions in negative affect.

    “TSF programs encourage participation in self‐ and mutual‐help organizations (e.g. Alcoholics Anonymous), which aim to reduce alcohol use via changes in the composition of one's social network, increases in abstinence self‐efficacy and spirituality, and reductions in negative affect (National Institute on Drug Abuse 2000; Kelly 2012; Humphreys 2014).”

    From Psychosocial and pharmacologic interventions to reduce harmful alcohol use in low- and middle-income countries (2023) · cites this paper as Humphreys 2014

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    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. Babor TF Del Boca F Treatment matching in alcoholism 2010 Cambridge, UK Cambridge University Press
  2. Humphreys K Moos R Two year clinical and cost offset outcomes of facilitating 12-step self-help group participation Alcohol Clin Exp Res 2007 31 64 68 17207103

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Humphreys, K., Blodgett, J. C., & Wagner, T. H.
Affiliations
VA Palo Alto Health Care System (US)
Corresponding author
Humphreys, Keith
Venue
Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-11
Volume
38
Issue
11
Pages
2688-2694
ISSN
  • 0145-6008 (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-0277
OpenAlex
W1991273865
Cited by
116
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 8
FWCI
7.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Alcoholism Clinical and Experimental Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • NIAAA (AA021473)
  • VA Health Services Research and Development Service
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Alcohol Consumption and Health Effects
Keywords
Alcoholics Anonymous, self-selection bias, selection bias correction, instrumental variables, alcoholism, abstinence, alcohol use outcomes, peer support groups
MeSH terms
Alcoholics Anonymous, Alcoholism, Humans, Self Care, Temperance, Selection Bias, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, 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