0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Effectiveness of incorporating contingency management into a public treatment program for people who use crack cocaine in Brazil. A single-blind randomized controlled trial

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references72

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Multiple Imputation after 18+ Years

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Sex differences in drug abuse.

            Sex differences are present for all of the phases of drug abuse (initiation, escalation of use, addiction, and relapse following abstinence). While there are some differences among specific classes of abused drugs, the general pattern of sex differences is the same for all drugs of abuse. Females begin regularly self-administering licit and illicit drugs of abuse at lower doses than do males, use escalates more rapidly to addiction, and females are at greater risk for relapse following abstinence. In this review, sex differences in drug abuse are discussed for humans and in animal models. The possible neuroendocrine mechanisms mediating these sex differences are discussed.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A meta-analytic review of psychosocial interventions for substance use disorders.

              Despite significant advances in psychosocial treatments for substance use disorders, the relative success of these approaches has not been well documented. In this meta-analysis, the authors provide effect sizes for various types of psychosocial treatments, as well as abstinence and treatment-retention rates for cannabis, cocaine, opiate, and polysubstance abuse and dependence treatment trials. With a comprehensive series of literature searches, the authors identified a total of 34 well-controlled treatment conditions-five for cannabis, nine for cocaine, seven for opiate, and 13 for polysubstance users-representing the treatment of 2,340 patients. Psychosocial treatments evaluated included contingency management, relapse prevention, general cognitive behavior therapy, and treatments combining cognitive behavior therapy and contingency management. Overall, controlled trial data suggest that psychosocial treatments provide benefits reflecting a moderate effect size according to Cohen's standards. These interventions were most efficacious for cannabis use and least efficacious for polysubstance use. The strongest effect was found for contingency management interventions. Approximately one-third of participants across all psychosocial treatments dropped out before treatment completion compared to 44.6% for the control conditions. Effect sizes for psychosocial treatments for illicit drugs ranged from the low-moderate to high-moderate range, depending on the substance disorder and treatment under study. Given the long-term social, emotional, and cognitive impairments associated with substance use disorders, these effect sizes are noteworthy and comparable to those for other efficacious treatments in psychiatry.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                International Journal of Drug Policy
                International Journal of Drug Policy
                Elsevier BV
                09553959
                January 2022
                January 2022
                : 99
                : 103464
                Article
                10.1016/j.drugpo.2021.103464
                097eca8d-6deb-4c82-b735-b91353bba28f
                © 2022

                https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/

                https://doi.org/10.15223/policy-017

                https://doi.org/10.15223/policy-037

                https://doi.org/10.15223/policy-012

                https://doi.org/10.15223/policy-029

                https://doi.org/10.15223/policy-004

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article