Literature DB >> 10739418

Use of exclusion criteria in selecting research subjects and its effect on the generalizability of alcohol treatment outcome studies.

K Humphreys1, C Weisner.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Researchers have not systematically examined how exclusion criteria used in selection of research subjects affect the generalizability of treatment outcome research. This study evaluated the use of exclusion criteria in alcohol treatment outcome research and its effects on the comparability of research subjects with real-world individuals seeking alcohol treatment.
METHOD: Eight of the most common exclusion criteria described in the alcohol treatment research literature were operationalized and applied to large, representative clinical patient samples from the public and private sectors to determine whether the hypothetical research samples differed substantially from real-world samples. Five hundred ninety-three consecutive individuals seeking alcohol treatment at one of eight treatment programs participated. A trained research technician gathered information from participants on demographic variables and on alcohol, drug, and psychiatric problems as measured by the Addiction Severity Index.
RESULTS: Large proportions of potential research subjects were excluded under most of the criteria tested. The overall pattern of results showed that African Americans, low-income individuals, and individuals who had more severe alcohol, drug, and psychiatric problems were disproportionately excluded under most criteria.
CONCLUSIONS: Exclusion criteria can result in alcohol treatment outcome research samples that are more heavily composed of white, economically stable, and higher-functioning individuals than are real-world samples of substance abuse patients seen in clinical practice, potentially compromising the generalizability of results. For both scientific and ethical reasons, in addition to studies that use exclusion criteria, outcome research that uses no or minimal exclusion criteria should be conducted so that alcohol treatment outcome research can be better generalized to vulnerable populations.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomedical and Behavioral Research; Empirical Approach

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10739418     DOI: 10.1176/appi.ajp.157.4.588

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Psychiatry        ISSN: 0002-953X            Impact factor:   18.112


  44 in total

1.  Generalizability of clinical trials for cannabis dependence to community samples.

Authors:  Mayumi Okuda; Deborah S Hasin; Mark Olfson; Sharaf S Khan; Edward V Nunes; Ivan Montoya; Shang-Min Liu; Bridget F Grant; Carlos Blanco
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2010-05-26       Impact factor: 4.492

2.  Alcohol screening and changes in problem drinking behaviors in medical care settings: a longitudinal perspective.

Authors:  Jason C Bond; Constance M Weisner; Kevin L Delucchi
Journal:  J Stud Alcohol Drugs       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 2.582

3.  Differences in pathological gambling prevalence estimates: facts or artefacts?

Authors:  Monika Sassen; Ludwig Kraus; Gerhard Bühringer
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 4.035

4.  Multicultural web-based motivational interviewing for clients with a first-time DUI offense.

Authors:  Karen Chan Osilla; Elizabeth J D'Amico; Claudia M Díaz-Fuentes; Marielena Lara; Katherine E Watkins
Journal:  Cultur Divers Ethnic Minor Psychol       Date:  2012-04

5.  Spirituality, Religiousness, and Alcoholism Treatment Outcomes: A Comparison between Black and White Participants.

Authors:  Amy R Krentzman; Kathleen J Farkas; Aloen L Townsend
Journal:  Alcohol Treat Q       Date:  2010-04-07

6.  Treatment outcomes for women with substance abuse and PTSD who have experienced complex trauma.

Authors:  Lisa R Cohen; Denise A Hien
Journal:  Psychiatr Serv       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 3.084

7.  Community program therapist adherence and competence in motivational enhancement therapy.

Authors:  Steve Martino; Samuel A Ball; Charla Nich; Tami L Frankforter; Kathleen M Carroll
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2008-03-06       Impact factor: 4.492

Review 8.  Thou shalt versus thou shalt not: a meta-synthesis of GPs' attitudes to clinical practice guidelines.

Authors:  Benedicte Carlsen; Claire Glenton; Catherine Pope
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 9.  Characteristics and methodological quality of 25 years of research investigating psychosocial interventions for cancer patients.

Authors:  Anne Moyer; Stephanie J Sohl; Sarah K Knapp-Oliver; Stefan Schneider
Journal:  Cancer Treat Rev       Date:  2009-03-04       Impact factor: 12.111

Review 10.  The ethics of uninsured participants accessing healthcare in biomedical research: A literature review.

Authors:  Hae Lin Cho; Marion Danis; Christine Grady
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2018-08-02       Impact factor: 2.486

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.