Evidence-based Principles of Treatment

NIDA确定了有效治疗药物滥用者的原则，“安德鲁斯小组” 确定了有效康复矫正治疗的原则。尽管有个别研究表明 支持NIDA为药物滥用者确定的原则，并由 安德鲁斯小组关于矫正为主的治疗，没有对全部研究进行系统综述或荟萃分析 已经进行了文献研究，以验证有效治疗药物滥用者的原则。在以前的 在这项研究中，NDRI和ISAP的研究小组开发了两个元分析数据库，包括 数百项关于药物滥用者治疗的初步研究，这些数据库包含 可用于测试9项治疗原则的变量：13项NIDA原则中的6项 安德鲁斯团队的三条原则。这项研究的主要目的是在方法论上进行强有力的 对这九条原则的检验。所采用的方法是对现有的 NDRI和ISAP元分析数据库，扩大到包括为该项目收集的最新研究。 估计总共将有700项关于治疗效果的研究可用于荟萃分析。次要的 目的是加强元分析技术，并通过(A)确定 对同一主题进行的荟萃分析的不一致之处的来源，并建议改进 议定书，(B)调整和验证初步研究方法质量的改进措施 (C)评估使用不同方法处理丢失数据的情况。该项目已 对实践的影响，因为它将为研究人员和从业者提供更多关于(1)的知识 哪些治疗原则在改善患者结果方面确实有效，可能在特定的情况下 调节因素(例如，与特定类型的客户)，以及(2)科学实力和局限性 使用当前协议的荟萃分析以及如何改进这一基本方法。

NIDA has identified principles of effective treatment for substance abusers and the "Andrews Group" has identified principles of effective rehabilitative correctional treatment. Although there are individual studies to support the principles identified by NIDA for substance abusers and there are meta-analytic studies by the Andrews group on corrections-based treatment, no systematic review or meta-analysis of the full research literature has been conducted to verify principles of effective treatment for substance abusers. In previous studies, the research teams from NDRI and ISAP developed two meta-analytic databases containing hundreds of primary research studies of treatment for substance abusers, and these databases contain variables that can be used to test nine of the principles of treatment: six of the thirteen NIDA principles and all three of the Andrews group's principles. The primary aim of this study is to conduct a methodologically strong test of these nine principles. The method employed is systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the existing NDRI and ISAP meta-analytic databases, expanded to include recent studies to be collected for this project. An estimated total of 700 studies of treatment effectiveness will be available for meta-analyses. A secondary aim is to strengthen meta-analytic techniques and improve the methodological quality by (a) identifying sources of inconsistencies in meta-analyses conducted on the same topic and recommending improved protocols, (b) adapting and validating improved measures of the methodological quality of primary research studies, and (c) evaluating the use of different methods for dealing with missing data. The project has implications for practice as it will provide researchers and practitioners substantially more knowledge of (1) which principles of treatment are indeed effective in improving client outcomes, possibly under specific moderating factors (e.g., with specific types of clients), and (2) the scientific strength and limitations of meta-analysis using current protocols and how this essential method can be improved.