Cited by 123Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesOpioid Use Disorder TreatmentHomelessness and Social Issues

Results from two randomized clinical trials evaluating the impact of quarterly recovery management checkups with adult chronic substance users

Open access
Scott, Christy K, Dennis, Michael L.·2009·Addiction

Abstract

Aims Post‐discharge monitoring and early reintervention have become standard practice when managing numerous chronic conditions. These two experiments tested the effectiveness of recovery management checkup (RMC) protocols for adult chronic substance users. Intervention RMC included quarterly monitoring; motivational interviewing to provide personalized feedback and to resolve ambivalence about substance use; treatment linkage, engagement and retention protocols to increase the amount of treatment received. Participants and setting Recruited from sequential addiction treatment admissions, participants in the two experiments were, on average, 36 and 38 years of age, mainly female (59% versus 46%), African American (85% versus 80%) and met past‐year criteria for dependence (87% versus 76%). Design Participants in both experiments were assigned randomly to the RMC or control condition and interviewed quarterly for 2 years. Measurement The Global Appraisal of Individual Needs (GAIN) was the main assessment instrument. Findings RMC participant outcomes were better than control participants in both experiments. Effect sizes were larger in the second experiment in terms of reducing days to readmission (Cohen's d = 0.41 versus d = 0.22), successive quarters in the community using substances (d = −0.32 versus −0.19), past‐month symptoms of abuse/dependence (d = −0.23 versus −0.02) and increasing the days of abstinence over 2 years (d = +0.29 versus 0.04). Conclusion RMC, which provided ongoing monitoring and linkage, is feasible to conduct and is effective for adults with chronic substance dependence.

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/j.1360-0443.2009.02525.x

Cites

29 of 29 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?

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

6 of the 35 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [26]Lamb S Greenlick MR McCarty D Bridging the gap between practice and research: Forging partnerships with community-based drug and alcohol treatment Washington, DC National Academy Press 1998 25101381

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Scott, C. K., & Dennis, M. L.
Affiliations
Chestnut Health Systems (US)
Corresponding author
Scott, Christy K
Venue
Addiction
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-05-06
Volume
104
Issue
6
Pages
959-971
ISSN
  • 0965-2140 (ISSN-L)
  • 1360-0443
OpenAlex
W2009249897
Cited by
123
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 11
FWCI
8.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Addiction (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Drug Abuse (R37DA011323, DA11323, R01DA011323)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Homelessness and Social Issues
Keywords
chronic substance use, substance dependence, post-discharge monitoring, motivational interviewing, linkage to treatment, treatment engagement and retention, relapse prevention, abstinence, addiction treatment
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Time Factors, Program Evaluation, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Substance-Related Disorders, Young Adult

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