Cited by 76Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsHealth Policy Implementation Science

Implementing treatment and protecting the validity of the independent variable in treatment matching studies

Carroll, K M, Kadden, R M, Donovan, D M, Zweben, A, Rounsaville, B J·1994·Journal of Studies on Alcohol, Supplement

Abstract

Treatment matching research is predicated on heterogeneity among subjects and their differential response to treatments. The sine qua non of a treatment matching study is the integrity of the treatment variable, since detection of client-treatment interactions requires delivery of treatments that are highly specific, consistent and distinct. Matching research thus presents particular challenges in treatment implementation, as greater heterogeneity in subjects may generate a broader array of problems than study treatments are designed to address, leading to several potential threats to treatment integrity. Moreover, as practiced outside of research settings, treatments for alcoholism are marked by ideological heterogeneity and a lack of purity across approaches. In this article we describe the strategies used in Project MATCH to protect treatment integrity while treating a large and heterogeneous sample of alcoholics in a number of geographically distant sites. These include: strategies for treating a variety of alcoholics within a single treatment approach; development of clinical care guidelines and clinical deterioration criteria; specification of treatments in manuals with minimization of overlapping active ingredients; selection criteria for therapists intended to enhance both generalizability of findings as well as treatment integrity; and extensive therapist training and monitoring.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.15288/jsas.1994.s12.149

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Carroll, K. M., Kadden, R. M., Donovan, D. M., Zweben, A., & Rounsaville, B. J.
Affiliations
Yale University (US)
Venue
Journal of Studies on Alcohol, Supplement
Published
1994-12
Volume
12
Issue
s12
Pages
149-155
ISSN
  • 0363-468X (ISSN-L)
  • 1946-6005
OpenAlex
W1972643154
Cited by
75
References
18
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 6
FWCI
2.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Studies on Alcohol Supplement (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
Keywords
implementation fidelity, treatment matching, Project MATCH, alcoholism treatment, treatment effect heterogeneity, therapist selection, therapist training, clinical guidelines, treatment manual, generalizability
MeSH terms
Alcoholism, Clinical Protocols, Humans, Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care, Psychotherapy, Research, Reproducibility of Results, Multicenter Studies as Topic, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Patient Selection

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