Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 312

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The reliability of Form 90: an instrument for assessing alcohol treatment outcome.

Tonigan, J S, Miller, W R, Brown, J M·1997·Journal of Studies on Alcohol

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Project MATCH is a randomized clinical trial consisting of five outpatient and five aftercare units at nine sites. Of importance in this multisite trial examining the efficacy of client-treatment matching was the cross- and within-site reliability of the structured interview used to assess alcohol treatment outcomes, the Form 90. Evaluation of the reliability of Form 90 is the subject of this article. METHOD: The reliability of Form 90 was evaluated in two test-retest studies. The cross-site reliability study consisted of 70 paired test-retest interviews conducted by different interviewers. Clients for this study were recruited from inpatient, outpatient and college settings. The within-site reliability study had a total of 108 paired test-retest interviews, with 54 of the retests conducted by different interviewers and 54 by the same interviewer. Clients for this study were most often presenting for alcohol treatment at the nine sites and were selected to be representative of the larger Project MATCH sample. RESULTS: Good-to-excellent reliability was found for all key summary measures of alcohol consumption and psychosocial functioning, and most frequently used illicit drugs had moderate reliability. No decay in consistency of self-reported drinking was found at more distal points from dates of test-retest interviews. Application of 68% confidence intervals for primary alcohol consumption measures suggests that trained researchers and clinicians can obtain consistent information regarding client drinking. CONCLUSIONS: Form 90 appears to be a reliable instrument for alcohol treatment assessment research when interviewers have received careful training and supervision in its use.

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 · 10.15288/jsa.1997.58.358

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Cited by

See all 312

Metadata

Authors
Tonigan, J. S., Miller, W. R., & Brown, J. M.
Venue
Journal of Studies on Alcohol
Published
1997-07
Volume
58
Issue
4
Pages
358-364
ISSN
  • 0096-882X (ISSN-L)
  • 1934-2683
OpenAlex
W2080999468
Cited by
312
References
3
FWCI
4.39
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 reliability of Form 90: an instrument for assessing alcohol treatment outcome. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.15288/jsa.1997.58.358
The paper
Tonigan, J. S., Miller, W. R., & Brown, J. M. (1997). The reliability of Form 90: an instrument for assessing alcohol treatment outcome. Journal of Studies on Alcohol. https://doi.org/10.15288/jsa.1997.58.358

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.