Ryoko Susukida1, Rosa M Crum1,2,3, Elizabeth A Stuart1, Cyrus Ebnesajjad1, Ramin Mojtabai1,3. 1. Department of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA. 2. Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA. 3. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Abstract
AIMS: To compare the characteristics of individuals participating in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of treatments of substance use disorder (SUD) with individuals receiving treatment in usual care settings, and to provide a summary quantitative measure of differences between characteristics of these two groups of individuals using propensity score methods. Design Analyses using data from RCT samples from the National Institute of Drug Abuse Clinical Trials Network (CTN) and target populations of patients drawn from the Treatment Episodes Data Set-Admissions (TEDS-A). Settings Multiple clinical trial sites and nation-wide usual SUD treatment settings in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 3592 individuals from 10 CTN samples and 1 602 226 individuals selected from TEDS-A between 2001 and 2009. Measurements The propensity scores for enrolling in the RCTs were computed based on the following nine observable characteristics: sex, race/ethnicity, age, education, employment status, marital status, admission to treatment through criminal justice, intravenous drug use and the number of prior treatments. Findings The proportion of those with ≥ 12 years of education and the proportion of those who had full-time jobs were significantly higher among RCT samples than among target populations (in seven and nine trials, respectively, at P < 0.001). The pooled difference in the mean propensity scores between the RCTs and the target population was 1.54 standard deviations and was statistically significant at P < 0.001. CONCLUSIONS: In the United States, individuals recruited into randomized controlled trials of substance use disorder treatments appear to be very different from individuals receiving treatment in usual care settings. Notably, RCT participants tend to have more years of education and a greater likelihood of full-time work compared with people receiving care in usual care settings.
AIMS: To compare the characteristics of individuals participating in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of treatments of substance use disorder (SUD) with individuals receiving treatment in usual care settings, and to provide a summary quantitative measure of differences between characteristics of these two groups of individuals using propensity score methods. Design Analyses using data from RCT samples from the National Institute of Drug Abuse Clinical Trials Network (CTN) and target populations of patients drawn from the Treatment Episodes Data Set-Admissions (TEDS-A). Settings Multiple clinical trial sites and nation-wide usual SUD treatment settings in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 3592 individuals from 10 CTN samples and 1 602 226 individuals selected from TEDS-A between 2001 and 2009. Measurements The propensity scores for enrolling in the RCTs were computed based on the following nine observable characteristics: sex, race/ethnicity, age, education, employment status, marital status, admission to treatment through criminal justice, intravenous drug use and the number of prior treatments. Findings The proportion of those with ≥ 12 years of education and the proportion of those who had full-time jobs were significantly higher among RCT samples than among target populations (in seven and nine trials, respectively, at P < 0.001). The pooled difference in the mean propensity scores between the RCTs and the target population was 1.54 standard deviations and was statistically significant at P < 0.001. CONCLUSIONS: In the United States, individuals recruited into randomized controlled trials of substance use disorder treatments appear to be very different from individuals receiving treatment in usual care settings. Notably, RCT participants tend to have more years of education and a greater likelihood of full-time work compared with people receiving care in usual care settings.
Authors: Elizabeth A Stuart; Stephen R Cole; Catherine P Bradshaw; Philip J Leaf Journal: J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc Date: 2001-04-01 Impact factor: 2.483
Authors: Kathleen M Carroll; Samuel A Ball; Charla Nich; Steve Martino; Tami L Frankforter; Christiane Farentinos; Lynn E Kunkel; Susan K Mikulich-Gilbertson; Jon Morgenstern; Jeanne L Obert; Doug Polcin; Ned Snead; George E Woody Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2005-09-28 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Shelly L Sayre; Joy M Schmitz; Angela L Stotts; Patricia M Averill; Howard M Rhoades; John J Grabowski Journal: Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse Date: 2002 Impact factor: 3.829
Authors: Ilene B Anderson; Susan Y Kim-Katz; Jo Ellen Dyer; Gillian E Earnest; John P Lamb; Paul D Blanc Journal: Clin Toxicol (Phila) Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 4.467
Authors: Judith G Rabkin; Martin McElhiney; Stephen J Ferrando; Wilfred Van Gorp; Shu Hsing Lin Journal: Psychosom Med Date: 2004 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 4.312
Authors: Carlos Blanco; Mark Olfson; Renee D Goodwin; Elizabeth Ogburn; Michael R Liebowitz; Edward V Nunes; Deborah S Hasin Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: Joseph Guydish; Deborah Yip; Thao Le; Noah R Gubner; Kevin Delucchi; Paul Roman Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Benjamin Ackerman; Ian Schmid; Kara E Rudolph; Marissa J Seamans; Ryoko Susukida; Ramin Mojtabai; Elizabeth A Stuart Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2018-10-25 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Anando Sen; Patrick B Ryan; Andrew Goldstein; Shreya Chakrabarti; Shuang Wang; Eileen Koski; Chunhua Weng Journal: Ann N Y Acad Sci Date: 2016-09-06 Impact factor: 5.691
Authors: Saima A Akbar; Rachel L Tomko; Claudia A Salazar; Lindsay M Squeglia; Erin A McClure Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2018-11-27 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Joseph Guydish; Barbara Tajima; Sowmya Pramod; Thao Le; Noah R Gubner; Barbara Campbell; Paul Roman Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2016-07-14 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Michael A Webster-Clark; Hanna K Sanoff; Til Stürmer; Sharon Peacock Hinton; Jennifer L Lund Journal: Epidemiology Date: 2019-01 Impact factor: 4.822