The Great Controlled-Drinking Controversy

Roizen, Ron

doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-1684-6_9

Cited by 48 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Early research also considered a variety of drinking goals (Pattison, 1976), including social drinking goals, as potential outcomes (Öjehagen & Berglund, 1989). However, small sample sizes in these studies, political distaste for non-abstinence outcomes, and the growing popularity of Alcoholics Anonymous led to a "controlled drinking controversy" in the 1980s and early 1990s (Edwards, 1994;Heather & Robertson, 1981;Roizen, 1987), with skepticism among treatment providers regarding non-abstinence drinking goals. A response to the controlled drinking debate and several commentaries (Sobell & Sobell, 1995) highlighted the disagreement within the field among both treatment researchers and providers, as well as the need for a broadening of perspectives and more data to inform the treatment community regarding the viability of non-abstinence treatment goals.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

How Much Is Too Much? Patterns of Drinking During Alcohol Treatment and Associations With Post-Treatment Outcomes Across Three Alcohol Clinical Trials

Witkiewitz

Roos

Pearson

et al. 2017

J. Stud. Alcohol Drugs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Objective:This secondary data analysis examined patterns of drinking during alcohol treatment and associated drinking outcomes during the first year following treatment. The goal was to provide clinicians with guidance on which patients may be most at risk for negative long-term outcomes based on drinking patterns during treatment. Method: This study was an analysis of existing data (N = 3,851) from three randomized clinical trials for alcohol use disorder: the COMBINE Study (n = 1,383), Project MATCH (n = 1,726), and the United Kingdom Alcohol Treatment Trial (n = 742). Indicators of abstinence, non-heavy drinking, and heavy drinking (defined as 4/5 or more drinks per day for women/men) were examined during each week of treatment using repeated-measures latent class analysis. Associations between drinking patterns during treatment and drinking intensity, drinking consequences, and physical and mental health 12 months following intake were examined. Results: Seven drinking patterns were identified. Patients who engaged in persistent heavy drinking throughout treatment and those who returned to persistent heavy drinking during treatment had the worst long-term outcomes. Patients who engaged in some heavy drinking during treatment had better long-term outcomes than persistent heavy drinkers. Patients who reported low-risk drinking or abstinence had the best long-term outcomes. There were no differences in outcomes between low-risk drinkers and abstainers. Conclusions: Abstinence, low-risk drinking, or even some heavy drinking during treatment are associated with the best long-term outcomes. Patients who are engaging in persistent heavy drinking are likely to have the worst outcomes and may require a higher level of care. (J. Stud. Alcohol Drugs, 78, 59-69, 2017)

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

How Much Is Too Much? Patterns of Drinking During Alcohol Treatment and Associations With Post-Treatment Outcomes Across Three Alcohol Clinical Trials

Witkiewitz

Roos

Pearson

et al. 2017

J. Stud. Alcohol Drugs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such research quickly became a notorious battlefield between scientific-and belief-based views of alcohol problems. Details of and opinions about specific conflicts abound in the literature (Heather & Robertson, 1983;Marlatt, 1983;Miller, 1983;Sobell & Sobell, 1984;Roizen, 1987;Duckert, 1989;Rosenberg, 1993). The debate related primarily to the treatment of severely dependent alcoholics (at the time the only population for which treatment was available; see Sobell & Sobell, 1994), and the nature and validity of the outcomes that occurred.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Controlled drinking after 25 years: how important was the great debate?

Sobell¹,

Sobell²

1995

Addiction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…One of the promises of this approach was that it replaces the need for controversy with unbiased and strictly 'scientific' investigations. It assumed that the current body of knowledge was 'pre-scientific' and moralistic while the new research program would provide 'objective' data to be considered without 'heat' or 'prejudice' (Roizen, 1987). Through these efforts to avoid controversy, alcohol researchers were responding to socially valued ends and using social criteria to evaluate the validity of a body of scientific research.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%