1996
DOI: 10.1016/0005-7967(95)00049-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Follow-up results of Supportive versus Behavioral Therapy for illicit drug use

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
55
0
2

Year Published

1999
1999
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 87 publications
(58 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
1
55
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…17 Furthermore, the behavioral therapy group showed more days worked, less alcohol use, and more days in school than did the supportive therapy group. Behavioral therapy use in the treatment of adolescent substance use has been expanded in the context of the family.…”
Section: Behavioral Therapymentioning
confidence: 94%
“…17 Furthermore, the behavioral therapy group showed more days worked, less alcohol use, and more days in school than did the supportive therapy group. Behavioral therapy use in the treatment of adolescent substance use has been expanded in the context of the family.…”
Section: Behavioral Therapymentioning
confidence: 94%
“…Results from randomized trials demonstrated significantly better outcomes for youths in the CM conditions, compared with supportive counseling, for drug use abstinence, mental health and conduct problems, and employment/school attendance (Azrin, Acierno et al, 1996;. To ensure the integrity of CM implementation in these clinical trials, Azrin and colleagues provided intensive and ongoing oversight of the therapy sessions.…”
Section: Contingency Management; Therapist Adherence; Rasch Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, investigators have consistently recommended that these interventions should be modified to handle the unique concerns of MR substance-abusers. The second and third authors of this article have not pub lished treatment outcome data specific to MR substance abusers, however, they have conducted controlled treatment outcome studies in which some cognitively impaired per sons were incidentally included in the study sample (Azrin et al 1996;. That is, persons who were formally diagnosed with mental retardation were excluded from the three aforementioned studies; however, about a dozen persons in these studies were then identified to be cognitively impaired, or in the borderline range of intellectual functioning, according to retrospective school or parent reports.…”
Section: Substance Abuse In the Mentally Retardedmentioning
confidence: 98%