Drug and Alcohol Dependence
Volume 67, Issue 1 , Pages 53-72, 1 June 2002

The effectiveness of drug abuse treatment: a meta-analysis of comparison group studies

  • Michael L. Prendergast

      Affiliations

    • Integrated Substance Abuse Programs, UCLA Drug Abuse Research Center, Neuropsychiatric Institute, University of California, 11050 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 150, Los Angeles, CA 90025, USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +1-310-445-0874; fax: +1-310-312-0559
  • ,
  • Deborah Podus

      Affiliations

    • Integrated Substance Abuse Programs, UCLA Drug Abuse Research Center, Neuropsychiatric Institute, University of California, 11050 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 150, Los Angeles, CA 90025, USA
  • ,
  • Eunice Chang

      Affiliations

    • Prescription Solutions, Mail Stop LC07-286, 3515 Harbor Blvd., Costa Mesa, CA 92626, USA
  • ,
  • Darren Urada

      Affiliations

    • Integrated Substance Abuse Programs, UCLA Drug Abuse Research Center, Neuropsychiatric Institute, University of California, 11050 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 150, Los Angeles, CA 90025, USA

Received 9 July 2001; received in revised form 15 January 2002; accepted 21 January 2002.

Abstract 

A meta-analysis was conducted on 78 studies of drug treatment conducted between 1965 and 1996. Each study compared outcomes among clients who received drug treatment with outcomes among clients who received either minimal treatment or no treatment. Five methodological variables were significant predictors of effect size. Larger effect sizes were associated with studies with the following characteristics: smaller numbers of dependent variables, significant differences between groups at admission, low levels of attrition in the treatment group, a passive comparison group (no treatment, minimal treatment) as opposed to an active comparison group (standard treatment), and drug use determined by a drug test. Controlling for these methodological variables, further analyses indicated that drug abuse treatment has both a statistically significant and a clinically meaningful effect in reducing drug use and crime, and that these effects are unlikely to be due to publication bias. For substance abuse outcomes, larger effect sizes tended to be found in studies in which treatment implementation was rated high, the degree of theoretical development of the treatment was rated low, or researcher allegiance to the treatment was rated as favorable. For crime outcomes, only the average age of study participants was a significant predictor of effect size, with treatment reducing crime to a greater degree among studies with samples consisting of younger adults as opposed to older adults. Treatment modality and other variables were not related to effect sizes for either drug use or crime outcomes

Keywords:  Drug abuse treatment, Treatment outcomes, Treatment effectiveness, Meta-analysis

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Readers interested in the codebook used for studies included in this meta-analysis can view it on the journal internet home page at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/drugalcdegsuppmat/.

PII: S0376-8716(02)00014-5

Refers to erratum:

  • Erratum to “The effectiveness of drug abuse treatment: a meta-analysis of comparison group studies” [Drug Alcohol Depend. 67 (2002) 53–72]

    Michael L. Prendergast, Deborah Podus, Eunice Chang, Darren Urada
    Drug and Alcohol Dependence 1 September 2006 (Vol. 84, Issue 1, Page 133)

Drug and Alcohol Dependence
Volume 67, Issue 1 , Pages 53-72, 1 June 2002