The Diagnostic Interview Schedule

Robins, Lee N.; Helzer, John E.; Orvaschel, Helen; Anthony, James C.; Blazer, Dan G.; Burnam, Audrey; Burke, Jack D.

doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-091798-6.50012-9

Cited by 278 publications

(142 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

139

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…They gave informed written consent prior to participation. Screening included medical, psychiatric, and drug-use histories; physical examination; standard laboratory screens; and a battery of assessment instruments, including the Addiction Severity Index (McLellan et al, 1985) and Diagnostic Interview Schedule (Version IV; Robins, Cottler, Bucholz, & Compton, 1995). Eligibility criteria were age 18-65 years, cocaine and heroin use (by self-report and urine screen), and physical dependence on heroin.…”

Section: Methods Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our hypothesis was that an increase in the likelihood of winning a prize in our drawing procedure would increase abstinence from cocaine. McLellan et al, 1985) and Diagnostic Interview Schedule (Version IV;Robins, Cottler, Bucholz, & Compton, 1995). Eligibility criteria were age 18-65 years, cocaine and heroin use (by self-report and urine screen), and physical dependence on heroin.…”

Section: Nih-pa Author Manuscriptmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Randomized trial of prize-based reinforcement density for simultaneous abstinence from cocaine and heroin.

Ghitza¹,

Epstein²,

Schmittner³

et al. 2007

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To examine the effect of reinforcer density in prize-based abstinence reinforcement, heroin/cocaine users (N = 116) in methadone maintenance (100 mg/day) were randomly assigned to a noncontingent control group (NonC) or to 1 of 3 groups that earned prize draws for abstinence: manual drawing with standard prize density (MS) or computerized drawing with standard (CS) or high (CH) density. Probabilities (prizes/draw) were standard (50%) and high (78%); prize density was double blind. Mean prize values were CH, $286; CS, $167; MS, $139; and NonC, $171. Outcomes were % opioid/ cocaine-negative urines during the 12-week intervention and then 8 weeks postintervention as well as diagnosis of dependence up to 6 months poststudy. CH had significantly more negative specimens than did NonC during intervention and had more than all groups during postintervention treatment: Mean % negative (95% confidence interval) during postintervention treatment adjusted for baseline drug use and dropout were CH, 55% (14%-90%); CS, 7% (1%-27%); MS, 4% (1%-12%); and NonC, 3% (1%-10%). Current cocaine dependence diagnoses after treatment were significantly lower in contingent compared with noncontingent groups. Computerized drawing with higherdensity prizes enhanced reduction of cocaine use; abstinence reinforcement had long-term therapeutic benefits. Keywords contingency management; opiate; cocaine dependence; opiate dependence; methadone maintenance One of the most robust means of inducing behavioral change in patients with heroin and cocaine dependence is a set of behavioral techniques called contingency management (CM;Higgins et al., 1991;Higgins & Silverman, 1999). An especially powerful component of CM is a voucherbased escalating-reinforcement schedule developed by Higgins et al. (1991), in which reinforcement increases with each consecutive drug-negative urine sample. This procedure has repeatedly been shown effective in the treatment of cocaine abuse and dependence, with or without concurrent dependence on heroin (Higgins et al., 1991;Silverman et al., 1996). Compared with a control procedure in which equivalent values of vouchers are given independent of cocaine use, the escalating-reinforcement procedure reduces the frequency of cocaine use, increases the mean duration of abstinence, reduces patients' ratings of their desire for cocaine, and increases the frequency with which abstainers report engaging in coping behaviors .Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Udi E. Ghitza, Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics Branch, Treatment Section, IRP, NIDA, NIH, 5500 Nathan Shock Drive, Baltimore, MD 21224. E-mail: ghitzau@intra.nida.nih.gov. NIH Public Access NIH-PA Author ManuscriptNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptThe voucher reinforcers used in the escalating-reinforcement procedure are certificates presented immediately on provision of a drug-negative urine sample; monetary values indicated on the certificates accrue and are redeemable later for a variety of goods and services. The use...

show abstract

Section: Methods Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Nih-pa Author Manuscriptmentioning

confidence: 99%

Randomized trial of prize-based reinforcement density for simultaneous abstinence from cocaine and heroin.

Ghitza¹,

Epstein²,

Schmittner³

et al. 2007

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition to their status as treatment patients, cases had to score at least one standard deviation above community norms on a composite of lifetime substance dependence symptoms from the CIDI-SAM (Robins et al, 1993) and conduct disorder symptoms from the DISC-IV (Shaffer et al, 1998) or DIS (Robins et al, 1998) (see Stallings et al, 2005 for details). The composite of substance dependence measures was the mean number of dependence symptoms averaged across substance classes subjects had tried to criterion (usually 6 or more trials), age-and sex-adjusted by community sample norms.…”

Section: Subjectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association of candidate genes with antisocial drug dependence in adolescents

Corley

Zeiger

Crowley

et al. 2008

Drug and Alcohol Dependence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Colorado Center for Antisocial Drug Dependence (CADD) is using several research designs and strategies in its study of the genetic basis for antisocial drug dependence in adolescents. This study reports Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) association results from a Targeted Gene Assay (SNP chip) of 231 Caucasian male probands in treatment with antisocial drug dependence and a matched set of community controls. The SNP chip was designed to assay 1500 SNPs distributed across 50 candidate genes that have had associations with substance use disorders and conduct disorder. There was an average gene-wide inter-SNP interval of 3000 base pairs. After eliminating SNPs with poor signals and low minor allele frequencies, 60 nominally significant associations were found among the remaining 1073 SNPs in 18 of 49 candidate genes. Although none of the SNPs achieved genome-wide association significance levels (defined as p < .000001), two genes probed with multiple SNPs (OPRM1 and CHRNA2) emerged as plausible candidates for a role in antisocial drug dependence after gene-based permutation tests. The custom-designed SNP chip served as an effective and flexible platform for rapid interrogation of a large number of plausible candidate genes.

show abstract

“…Participants gave informed written consent prior to participation. Participant screening included: medical, psychiatric, and drug-use histories; physical examination; standard laboratory screens; a battery of assessment instruments, including the ASI and the Diagnostic Interview Schedule (DIS-IV) (Robins, 1995). Eligibility criteria for enrollment in the study were: age 18-65, cocaine and opiate use (by self-report and urine screen), and physical dependence on opiates.…”

Section: Study Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self-report of illicit benzodiazepine use on the Addiction Severity Index predicts treatment outcome

Ghitza

Epstein

Preston

2008

Drug and Alcohol Dependence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relationship between pretreatment illicit benzodiazepine use (days of use in the last 30) assessed on the Addiction Severity Index (ASI) and treatment outcome was investigated by retrospective analysis of data from two controlled clinical trials in 361 methadone maintained cocaine/opiate users randomly assigned to 12-week voucher-or prize-based contingency management (CM) or control interventions. Based on screening ASI, participants were identified as nonusers (BZD-N; 0 days of use) or users (BZD-U; >0 days of use). Outcome measures were: urine drug screens (thrice weekly); quality of life and self-reported HIV-risk behaviors (every 2 weeks); and current DSM-IV diagnosis of cocaine and heroin dependence (study exit). In the CM group, BZD-U had significantly worse outcomes on in-treatment cocaine use, quality-of-life scores, needle-sharing behaviors, and current heroin dependence diagnoses at study exit compared to BZD-N. In the control group, BZD-U had significantly higher in-treatment cocaine use but did not differ from BZD-N on psychosocial measures. Thus, in a sample of non-dependent BZD users, self-reported illicit BZD use on the ASI, even at low levels, predicted worse outcome on cocaine use and blunted response to CM.

show abstract

The Diagnostic Interview Schedule

Cited by 278 publications

References 18 publications

Randomized trial of prize-based reinforcement density for simultaneous abstinence from cocaine and heroin.

Randomized trial of prize-based reinforcement density for simultaneous abstinence from cocaine and heroin.

Association of candidate genes with antisocial drug dependence in adolescents

Self-report of illicit benzodiazepine use on the Addiction Severity Index predicts treatment outcome

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About