Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorBjørnestad, Jone Ravndal
dc.contributor.authorMcKay, James R.
dc.contributor.authorBerg, Henrik
dc.contributor.authorMoltu, Christian
dc.contributor.authorNesvåg, Sverre Martin
dc.date.accessioned2021-04-21T14:31:08Z
dc.date.available2021-04-21T14:31:08Z
dc.date.created2020-03-16T17:12:35Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.PublishedDrug and Alcohol Review. 2020, 1-21.
dc.identifier.issn0959-5236
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/2738956
dc.description.abstractIssues Recovery is a theoretical construct and empirical object of inquiry. The aim was to review whether outcome measures used in randomised controlled trials of drug treatment reflect a comprehensive conceptualisation of recovery. Approach Systematic review using the following databases: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effect, Web of Science, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO. Search returned 6556 original articles and 504 met the following inclusion criteria: randomised controlled trial in English‐language peer‐reviewed journal; sample meets criteria for drug dependence or drug use disorder; reports non‐substance use treatment outcomes. Review protocol registration: PROSPERO (CRD42018090064). Key Findings 3.8% of the included studies had a follow up of 2 years or more. Withdrawal/craving was present in 31.1% of short‐term versus 0% of long‐term studies. Social functioning in 8% of short‐term versus 36.8% of long‐term studies. Role functioning (0.9 vs. 26.3%), risk behaviour (15.6 vs. 36.8%) and criminality (3.8 vs. 21.1%) followed a similar pattern. Housing was not examined short‐term and unregularly long‐term (2.0%). ‘Use of health‐care facilities’, clinical psychological, behavioural factors were frequently reported. Physiological or somatic health (15.2 vs. 10.5%), motivation (14.2 vs. 15.8%) and quality of life (7.1 vs. 0%) were less frequently reported. Conclusion The short time interval of the follow up and lack of information on relevant factors in recovery prevents the development of evidence‐based approaches to improve these factors. Particularly, measures of social and role functioning should be added to reflect an adequate conceptualisation of recovery.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherWileyen_US
dc.rightsNavngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleHow often are outcomes other than change in substance use measured? A systematic review of outcome measures in contemporary randomised controlled trialsen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2020 The Authorsen_US
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/dar.13051
dc.identifier.cristin1801904
dc.source.journalDrug and Alcohol Reviewen_US
dc.source.pagenumber394-414en_US
dc.identifier.citationDrug and Alcohol Review. 2020, 39, 4, 394-414en_US
dc.source.volume39en_US
dc.source.issue4en_US


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal