CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 154Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsHomelessness and Social Issues

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The clients’ perspective on change during treatment for an alcohol problem: qualitative analysis of follow‐up interviews in the UK Alcohol Treatment Trial

Orford, Jim, Hodgson, Ray, Copello, Alex, John, Bev, Smith, Melanie, Black, Rachel, Fryer, Kate, Handforth, Linda, Alwyn, Tina, Kerr, Cicely, Thistlethwaite, Gill, Slegg, Gary, UKATT Research Team·2006·Addiction
DOI 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2005.01291.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Aim To develop a model of change during and following professional treatment for drinking problems, grounded in clients’ accounts. Participants Subsets of consecutively selected clients of the UK Alcohol Treatment Trial (UKATT), followed‐up at 3 months (n = 211) and 12 months (n = 198) after randomization. Location Five statutory and non‐statutory alcohol problems treatment agencies in three areas of England and Wales. Data Open‐ended interviews conducted according to a brief interview guide, leading to 400–800‐word post‐interview reports used for analysis (tape‐recordings used for auditing purposes). Analysis Reports analysed by a team according to grounded theory principles, involving an iterative process with successive refinement of interviewing and analysis with each successive batch of data. Findings A model of change from the clients’ perspective was developed. Treatment was seen by clients as facilitating various changes in ways of thinking and/or increased support of various kinds from family and friends, along with new ways of acting in relation to drinking or more generally. For many those changes had led to an appreciation of the benefits accruing to them. Treatment was seen as part of a broader treatment system which included pretreatment assessment, forms of help additional to the trial treatment, plus an element of self‐directed change during and following treatment. Taken with awareness of worsening alcohol‐related harms, triggering events and external influence to seek treatment (the catalyst system), to which clients continued to refer following treatment, the change process is depicted as a complex, ongoing set of systems in which a trial treatment is embedded. Conclusions Models of change should be broadened so that treatment is seen as a complex system of parts, facilitating a nexus of cognitive, social and behavioural changes, embedded within a broader system of events and processes catalysing change. Such a model helps explain the relative absence of between‐treatments outcome differences in UKATT and in the alcohol problems treatment and more general psychotherapy research literatures.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2005.01291.x

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Glaser B. G., 1992, Emergence vs Forcing: Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis
  2. Orford J., Why people enter treatment for alcohol problems: findings from UKATT pre‐treatment interviews, Journal of Substance Use
  3. Sobell L. C., 1991, Self‐Control and Addictive Behaviors, 198

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 154

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Orford, J., Hodgson, R., Copello, A., John, B., Smith, M., Black, R., Fryer, K., Handforth, L., Alwyn, T., Kerr, C., Thistlethwaite, G., Slegg, G., & UKATT Research Team
Affiliations
  • Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • University of Wales Institute Cardiff (SG)
  • Wythenshawe Hospital (GB)
  • University of Sheffield (GB)
  • Cardiff Metropolitan University (GB)
  • University College London (GB)
  • Bangor University (GB)
Corresponding author
Orford, Jim
ORCID
Venue
Addiction
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-11-18
Volume
101
Issue
1
Pages
60-68
ISSN
  • 0965-2140 (ISSN-L)
  • 1360-0443
DOI
10.1111/j.1360-0443.2005.01291.x
OpenAlex
W2061468490
Cited by
153
References
25
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 11
FWCI
6.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
  • Addiction (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Kent Academic Repository (University of Kent) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion)
  • Cardiff Metropolitan Research Repository (Cardiff Metropolitan University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Homelessness and Social Issues
Keywords
customer perspective, change models, cognitive change, social support, self-directed change, catalytic systems, treatment system, follow-up interviews
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Alcohol Drinking, Alcoholism, Family, Female, Humans, Interview, Psychological, Male, Models, Psychological, Motivation, Patients, Self-Assessment, Self Concept, Social Behavior, Social Support, Thinking

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