BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVES: HIV continues to be a significant problem among substance users and their sexual partners in the United States. The National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) offers a national platform for effectiveness trials of HIV interventions in community substance abuse treatment programs. This article presents the HIV activities of the CTN during its first 10 years. RESULTS: While emphasizing CTN HIV protocols, this article reviews the (1) HIV context for this work; (2) the collaborative process among providers, researchers, and National Institute on Drug Abuse CTN staff, on which CTN HIV work was based; (3) results of CTN HIV protocols and HIV secondary analyses in CTN non-HIV protocols; and (4) implications for future HIV intervention effectiveness research in community substance abuse treatment programs. CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE: While the feasibility of engaging frontline providers in this research is highlighted, the limitations of small to medium effect sizes and weak adoption and sustainability in everyday practice are also discussed.
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVES: HIV continues to be a significant problem among substance users and their sexual partners in the United States. The National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) offers a national platform for effectiveness trials of HIV interventions in community substance abuse treatment programs. This article presents the HIV activities of the CTN during its first 10 years. RESULTS: While emphasizing CTN HIV protocols, this article reviews the (1) HIV context for this work; (2) the collaborative process among providers, researchers, and National Institute on Drug AbuseCTN staff, on which CTN HIV work was based; (3) results of CTN HIV protocols and HIV secondary analyses in CTN non-HIV protocols; and (4) implications for future HIV intervention effectiveness research in community substance abuse treatment programs. CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE: While the feasibility of engaging frontline providers in this research is highlighted, the limitations of small to medium effect sizes and weak adoption and sustainability in everyday practice are also discussed.
Authors: Julio S G Montaner; Robert Hogg; Evan Wood; Thomas Kerr; Mark Tyndall; Adrian R Levy; P Richard Harrigan Journal: Lancet Date: 2006-08-05 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Nora D Volkow; Gene-Jack Wang; Joanna S Fowler; Frank Telang; Millard Jayne; Christopher Wong Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Lynn E Sullivan; Declan Barry; Brent A Moore; Marek C Chawarski; Jeanette M Tetrault; Michael V Pantalon; Patrick G O'Connor; Richard S Schottenfeld; David A Fiellin Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2006-12-15 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: M L Kamb; M Fishbein; J M Douglas; F Rhodes; J Rogers; G Bolan; J Zenilman; T Hoxworth; C K Malotte; M Iatesta; C Kent; A Lentz; S Graziano; R H Byers; T A Peterman Journal: JAMA Date: 1998-10-07 Impact factor: 56.272