The DOI matches its Crossref record; 117 of the 117 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment With Adult Alcohol and Illicit Drug Users: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis examined 53 controlled trials of cognitive-behavioral treatment (CBT) for adults diagnosed with alcohol- or illicit-drug-use disorders. The aims were to provide an overall picture of CBT treatment efficacy and to identify client or treatment factors predictive of CBT effect magnitude. METHOD: The inverse variance weighted effect size (Hedges' g) was calculated for each study and pooled using fixed and random effects methods. Potential study-level moderators were assessed in subgroup analyses by primary drug, type of CBT, and type of comparison condition. In addition, seven client and treatment variables were examined in meta-regression analyses. RESULTS: Across studies, CBT produced a small but statistically significant treatment effect (g = 0.154, p < .005). The pooled effect was somewhat lower at 6-9 months (g = 0.1 15, p < .005) and continued to diminish at 12-month follow-up (g = 0.096, p < .05). The effect of CBT was largest in marijuana studies (g = 0.513, p < .005) and in studies with a no-treatment control as the comparison condition (g = 0.796, p < .005). Meta-regression analyses indicated that the percentage of female participants was positively associated and the number of treatment sessions was negatively associated with effect size. CONCLUSIONS: The findings demonstrate the utility of CBT across a large and diverse sample of studies and under rigorous conditions for establishing efficacy. CBT effects were strongest with marijuana users, when CBT was compared with no treatment, and may be larger with women than with men and when delivered in a brief format.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“However, some patients are resistant to CBTs and its effectiveness decreases in the long term.4”
From Feasibility, acceptability and preliminary outcomes of a mindfulness-based relapse prevention program in a naturalistic setting among treatment-seeking patients with alcohol use disorder: A prospective observational study (2019) · cites this paper as [4]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Magill and Ray [41] found that CBT was most effective for individuals with marijuana use disorders.”
From Relapse prevention for addictive behaviors (2011) · cites this paper as [41]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“the authors concluded that 58% of individuals who received CBT had better outcomes than those in comparison conditions.”
From Relapse prevention for addictive behaviors (2011) · cites this paper as [41]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“It is widely known as being effective for a range of conditions, including cessation of smoking [57] and other drugs [58], managing pain [59], and relieving symptoms of mental ill-health across a range of psychological disorders [56].”
From Apps with maps-anxiety and depression mobile apps with evidence-based frameworks: Systematic search of major app stores (2020) · cites this paper as [58]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“There is evidence supporting the efficacy of CBTs in the treatment of addictions.4”
In the citing paper
“Even though several psychosocial interventions have shown their efficacy for treating drug, alcohol (Dutra et al., 2008; Magill and Ray, 2009), and gambling disorders (Pallesen et al., 2005; Gooding and Tarrier, 2009), help-seeking rates are low.”
From Online and Mobile Interventions for Problem Gambling, Alcohol, and Drugs: A Systematic Review (2017) · cites this paper as Magill and Ray, 2009
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
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
Higgins, J. P. T., Thompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 · Cited by 63,139
Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis
Higgins, J. P. T., & Thompson, S. G. (2002) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1186 · Cited by 36,763
Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias
Begg, C. B., & Mazumdar, M. (1994) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2533446 · Cited by 16,955
Wasserman, S. S., Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1988) · Journal of Educational Statistics · doi:10.2307/1164953 · Cited by 10,377
(2000) · Cited by 9,198
Moher, D., Cook, D. J., Eastwood, S., Olkin, I., Rennie, D., & Stroup, D. F. (1999) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(99)04149-5 · Cited by 4,826
The empirical status of cognitive-behavioral therapy: A review of meta-analyses
Butler, A. C., Chapman, J. E., Forman, E. M., & Beck, A. T. (2006) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2005.07.003 · Cited by 3,215
Fixed-and random-effects models in meta-analysis.
Hedges, L. V., & Vevea, J. L. (1998) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.3.4.486 · Cited by 2,977
Relapse Prevention: Maintenance Strategies in the Treatment of Addictive Behaviors
Washton, A. M. (1986) · Journal of Studies on Alcohol · doi:10.15288/jsa.1986.47.260 · Cited by 2,531
Anton, R. F., O’Malley, S. S., Ciraulo, D. A., Cisler, R. A., Couper, D., Donovan, D. M., Gastfriend, D. R., Hosking, J. D., Johnson, B. A., LoCastro, J. S., et al. (2006) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.295.17.2003 · Cited by 1,930
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- [17]17. CARROLL, K.M. Behavioral and cognitive behavioral treatments. In: MC- CRADY, B.S. AND EPSTEIN, E.E. (Eds.) Addictions: A Comprehensive Guidebook, New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1999, pp. 250-267.
- [45]45. HEDGES, L.V. AND OLKIN, I. Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis, San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 1985.
- [73]73. MILLER, W.R., WILBOURNE, P.L., AND HETTEMA, J.E. What works? A summary of alcohol treatment outcome research. In: HESTER, R.K. AND MILLER, W.R. Handbook of Alcoholism Treatment Approaches: Effective Alter- natives, 3rd Edition, Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 2003, pp. 13-63.
- [77]77. MONTI, P.M. AND ROHSENOW, D.J. Coping skills training and cue exposure treatment. In: HESTER, R.K. AND MILLER, W.R. (Eds.) Handbook of Alcoholism Treatment Approaches: Effective Alternatives, 3rd Edition, Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 2003, pp. 213-236.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Grant, B. F., Goldstein, R. B., Saha, T. D., Chou, S. P., Jung, J., Zhang, H., Pickering, R. P., Ruan, W. J., Smith, S. M., Huang, B., et al. (2015) · JAMA Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2015.0584 · Cited by 2,556
Grant, B. F., Chou, S. P., Saha, T. D., Pickering, R. P., Kerridge, B. T., Ruan, W. J., Huang, B., Jung, J., Zhang, H., Fan, A., et al. (2017) · JAMA Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2017.2161 · Cited by 1,362
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Substance Use Disorders
McHugh, R. K., Hearon, B. A., & Otto, M. W. (2010) · Psychiatric Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/j.psc.2010.04.012 · Cited by 626
“Evidence for the efficacy of CBT for SUDs is supported in meta-analytic reviews, with effect size estimations in the low moderate range using heterogeneous comparison conditions(4) and large effect sizes compared with no-treatment control groups.(5)”
InfluentialPachankis, J. E., Hatzenbuehler, M. L., Rendina, H. J., Safren, S. A., & Parsons, J. T. (2015) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/ccp0000037 · Cited by 619
Advances in the science and treatment of alcohol use disorder
Witkiewitz, K. A., Litten, R. Z., & Leggio, L. (2019) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.aax4043 · Cited by 629
Metadata
- Authors
- Magill, M., & Ray, L. A.
- Affiliations
- Brown University (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs
- Publisher
- Alcohol Research Documentation, Inc.
- Published
- 2009-07
- Volume
- 70
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 516-527
- ISSN
- 1937-1888 (ISSN-L)
- 1938-4114
- PMC
- PMC2696292
- OpenAlex
- W2035068440
- Cited by
- 694
- References
- 111
- Citations by year
- 2026: 21 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 47 · 2023: 45 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 55 · 2020: 128 · 2019: 45 · 2018: 55 · 2017: 39 · 2016: 34 · 2015: 40 · 2014: 45 · 2013: 32 · 2012: 22
- FWCI
- 1.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Boston College
- National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (T32 AA07459-22, AA07459, T32AA007459)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Keywords
- cognitive behavioral therapy, alcoholism, treatment efficacy, cannabis use, short-term treatment, gender differences
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Alcoholism, Female, Humans, Male, Sex Characteristics, Time Factors, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome, Substance-Related Disorders
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
