Cited by 33Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesSmoking Behavior and CessationOpioid Use Disorder Treatment

A developmental-based motivational intervention to reduce alcohol and marijuana use among non-treatment-seeking young adults: a randomized controlled trial

Open access
Stein, Michael D., Caviness, Celeste M., Morse, Emily F., Grimone, Kristin R., Audet, Daniel, Herman, Debra S., Moitra, Ethan, Anderson, Bradley J.·2018·Addiction

Abstract

Aims: To test the hypothesis that among non‐treatment‐seeking emerging adults (EA) who both use marijuana and have alcohol binges, a brief, longitudinally delivered, developmentally based motivational intervention would show greater reductions in the use of these two substances compared with a health education control condition. Design: Parallel, two‐group, randomized controlled trial with follow‐up interventions conducted at 1, 3, 6 and 9 months and final assessments at 12 and 15 months. Setting: Hospital‐based research unit in the United States. Participants: Community‐based 18–25‐year‐olds who reported at least monthly binge drinking and at least weekly marijuana use. Intervention: Motivational intervention (EA‐MI) focused primarily on themes of emerging adulthood (identity exploration, instability, self‐focus, feeling in‐between, a sense of possibilities) and the subjects' relationship to substance use ( n = 110) compared with an attention‐matched health education control condition ( n = 116). Measurements: The primary outcomes were days of binge alcohol, marijuana and dual use day as measured using the timeline follow‐back method analysing the treatment by time interaction to determine relative differences in the rate of change between intervention arms. Findings: At baseline, the mean rate (days/30) of binge drinking was 5.23 (± 4.31) of marijuana use was 19.4 (± 10.0) and of dual (same day) use was 4.11 (± 4.13). Relative to baseline, there were reductions in the rate of binge alcohol use, marijuana use and days of combined binge alcohol and marijuana use ( P < 0.001) at all follow‐up assessments. However, the treatment × time interaction was not statistically significant for alcohol ( P = 0.37), for marijuana ( P = 0.07) or for dual use ( P = 0.55). Averaged over all follow‐ups, mean reductions in binge, marijuana and dual use days were 1.16, 1.45 and 1.08, respectively, in the health education arm, and 1.06, 1.69 and 0.96 in EA‐MI. Bayes factors were < 0.01 for frequency of binge alcohol use and frequency of dual binge alcohol and marijuana and 0.016 for marijuana use. Conclusions: A brief, longitudinally delivered, developmentally based motivational intervention for young adults did not produce reductions in binge alcohol, marijuana use or dual use days relative to a control condition.

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/add.14026

Cites

90 of 90 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

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: 1

  1. [88]Stephens RS Roffman RA Fearer SA Williams C Burke RS The Marijuana Check-up: promoting change in ambivalent marijuana users Addiction 2007 102 6 947 957 17523990

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stein, M. D., Caviness, C. M., Morse, E. F., Grimone, K. R., Audet, D., Herman, D. S., Moitra, E., & Anderson, B. J.
Affiliations
  • Boston University (US)
  • Butler Hospital (US)
  • Brown University (US)
Corresponding author
Stein, Michael D.
Venue
Addiction
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-10-16
Volume
113
Issue
3
Pages
440-453
ISSN
  • 0965-2140 (ISSN-L)
  • 1360-0443
OpenAlex
W2750636263
Cited by
33
References
89
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3
FWCI
3.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Addiction (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (R01AA020509)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
Keywords
emerging adulthood, binge drinking, cannabis use, dual substance use, identity exploration, health education, brief intervention, substance use reduction, treatment-seeking behavior, Bayes factor
MeSH terms
Marijuana Use, Adolescent, Adult, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Psychotherapy, Brief, United States, Comorbidity, Young Adult, Motivational Interviewing, Binge Drinking

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