Alcohol treatment research assessment exposure subject reactivity effects: Part I. Alcohol use and related consequences
Alcohol treatment research assessment exposure subject reactivity effects: Part I. Alcohol use and related consequences
复制标题
DOI：
10.15288/jsad.2007.68.519
复制
发表时间：
2007-07-01
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
Davis, Christine M.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Clifford, Patrick R.;Maisto, Stephen A.;Davis, Christine M.
目的：酒精治疗研究人员越来越认识到，研究评估暴露受试者的反应性影响可能有助于临床结局，降低研究设计的敏感性，并混淆研究结果。本研究是对研究评估访谈中两个比较突出的组成部分（即，频率和全面性）及其对临床结局（第一部分：酒精使用和相关后果）和治疗参与（第11部分：治疗参与和参与）的影响。方法：研究设计为2（评估频率）× 2（评估综合性）完全随机析因，研究参与者使用瓮随机化程序随机分配到四种实验研究评估暴露条件之一：（1）频繁-综合，（2）频繁-简短，（3）罕见-全面，（4）罕见-简短。研究参与者是从两个医院的酒精和其他药物滥用门诊招募的。235名受试者被随机分配到四个研究评估暴露条件之一。结果如下：研究评估暴露受试者的反应性效应与酒精使用和相关的负面后果显着相关，例如分配到罕见的简短研究评估暴露条件下的受试者报告的结果最差。结论：用于研究酒精治疗的研究方案具有临床疗效，并且可以改变结果（例如，酒精使用情况正在调查中。研究人员在进行酒精治疗结局试验时，控制/解释受试者的反应性影响非常重要。对酒精治疗临床试验数据的准确解释需要考虑研究评估暴露受试者反应性的影响。
Objective: There has been increasing recognition among alcohol treatment researchers that research assessment exposure subject reactivity effects can contribute to clinical outcomes, decrease study design sensitivity, and confound research findings. The present study is an experimental investigation of two of the more salient components of the research assessment interview (i.e., frequency and comprehensiveness) and their effects on clinical outcomes (Part I: Alcohol Use and Related Consequences) and treatment participation (Part 11: Treatment Engagement and Involvement). Method: The study design was a 2 (Frequency of Assessment) x 2 (Comprehensiveness of Assessment) completely randomized factorial, and study participants were randomly assigned, using an urn randomization procedure, to one of the resulting four experimental research assessment exposure conditions: (1) frequent-comprehensive, (2) frequent-brief, (3) infrequent-comprehensive, and (4) infrequent-brief. Study participants were recruited from one of two hos- pital-based outpatient alcohol- and other substance-abuse clinics. Two hundred thirty-five subjects were randomly assigned to one of the four research assessment exposure conditions. Results: Research assessment exposure subject reactivity effects were related significantly to alcohol use and related negative consequences, such that subjects assigned to the infrequent-brief research assessment exposure condition reported the poorest outcomes. Conclusions: The research protocols used to study alcohol treatments have clinical efficacy and can alter the outcomes (e.g., alcohol use) under investigation. It is important for researchers to control/account for subject reactivity effects when conducting alcohol treatment outcome trials. Accurate interpretation of data derived from clinical trials of alcohol treatments necessitates taking research assessment exposure subject reactivity effects into consideration.