Prevalence and predictors of research participant eligibility criteria in alcohol treatment outcome studies, 1970-98

被引:48
作者
Humphreys, K
Weingardt, KR
Horst, D
Joshi, AA
Finney, JW
机构
[1] Vet Affairs Med Ctr, Palo Alto, CA 94304 USA
[2] Stanford Univ, Ctr Med, Palo Alto, CA 94304 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1111/j.1360-0443.2005.01175.x
中图分类号
R194 [卫生标准、卫生检查、医药管理];
学科分类号
摘要
Aims To describe the eligibility criteria (i.e. study participant inclusion and exclusion rules) employed in alcohol treatment outcome research and to identify predictors of their use. Design The eligibility criteria of 683 alcohol treatment outcome studies conducted between 1970 and 1998 were coded reliably into 14 general categories. Predictors of the use of eligibility criteria were then examined. Findings Patients were most often ruled ineligible for research studies because of their level of alcohol problems (39.1% of studies), comorbid psychiatric problems (37.8%), past or concurrent utilization of alcohol treatment (31.8%), co-occurring medical conditions (31.6%), and because they were deemed non-compliant and unmotivated (31.5%). The number of eligibility criteria employed in studies increased from the 1970s through the 1990s, and was positively associated with funding from the US National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) and from the private sector, lack of an inpatient/residential treatment condition, presence of a pharmacotherapy, and use of a randomized, multiple-condition design. Principal investigators with doctoral degrees used more eligibility criteria than those with lower degrees. Conclusion Participant eligibility criteria are extensively employed in alcohol treatment outcome research, and vary significantly across historical periods, funders and research designs. Researchers should report the details of subject eligibility criteria and excluded patients more fully, and, evaluate how eligibility criteria affect the cost, feasibility, and generalizability of treatment outcome research.
引用
收藏
页码:1249 / 1257
页数:9
相关论文
共 15 条
[1]  
Allen JP, 1997, J STUD ALCOHOL, V58, P7
[2]   ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS OF REJECTING PATIENTS FOR CLINICAL-TRIALS [J].
CHALMERS, TC .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1990, 263 (06) :865-865
[3]   Outcome variables and their assessment in alcohol treatment studies: 1968-1998 [J].
Finney, JW ;
Moyer, A ;
Swearingen, CE .
ALCOHOLISM-CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH, 2003, 27 (10) :1671-1679
[4]   A study in contrasts: Eligibility criteria in a twenty-year sample of NSABP and POG clinical trials [J].
Fuks, A ;
Weijer, C ;
Freedman, B ;
Shapiro, S ;
Skrutkowska, M ;
Riaz, A .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1998, 51 (02) :69-79
[5]   Do participants in alcoholism treatment outcome studies resemble patients seen in everday practice? [J].
Humphreys, K .
PSYCHIATRIC SERVICES, 2003, 54 (12) :1576-1576
[6]   Use of exclusion criteria in selecting research subjects and its effect on the generalizability of alcohol treatment outcome studies [J].
Humphreys, K ;
Weisner, C .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY, 2000, 157 (04) :588-594
[7]   Random versus nonrandom assignment in the evaluation of treatment for cocaine abusers [J].
McKay, JR ;
Alterman, AI ;
McLellan, AT ;
Boardman, CR ;
Mulvaney, FD ;
O'Brien, CP .
JOURNAL OF CONSULTING AND CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1998, 66 (04) :697-701
[8]   EFFECT OF RANDOM VERSUS NONRANDOM ASSIGNMENT IN A COMPARISON OF INPATIENT AND DAY HOSPITAL REHABILITATION FOR MALE ALCOHOLICS [J].
MCKAY, JR ;
ALTERMAN, AI ;
MCLELLAN, AT ;
SNIDER, EC ;
OBRIEN, CP .
JOURNAL OF CONSULTING AND CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1995, 63 (01) :70-78
[9]   The CONSORT statement: Revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials [J].
Moher, D ;
Schulz, KF ;
Altman, D .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2001, 285 (15) :1987-1991
[10]   Explaining abstinence rates following treatment for alcohol abuse: A quantitative synthesis of patient, research design and treatment effects [J].
Monahan, SC ;
Finney, JW .
ADDICTION, 1996, 91 (06) :787-805