What does it take to retain substance-abusing adolescents in research protocols? Delineation of effort required, strategies undertaken, costs incurred, and 6-month post-treatment differences by retention difficulty

Drug and Alcohol Dependence

Volumn 69, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 73-85

  Meyers, Kathleen ^a,b   Webb, Alicia ^a   Frantz, Jeanne ^a   Randall, Mary ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b RUTGERS ROBERT WOOD JOHNSON MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

Adolescents; Alcohol and drug use; Attrition; Follow up; Mental health; Outcome; Retention

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ARTICLE; BEHAVIOR DISORDER; COMMUNITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HOUSEHOLD; HUMAN; INTERVIEW; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PRIVACY; RELIABILITY; SUBSTANCE ABUSE; TELEPHONE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VALIDATION PROCESS;

ADOLESCENT; CLINICAL PROTOCOLS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS; MALE; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; SUBSTANCE-RELATED DISORDERS;

EID: 0037462365     PISSN: 03768716     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0376-8716(02)00252-1     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Alford G.S., Koehler R.A., Leonard J. Alcoholics Anonymous-Narcotics Anonymous model inpatient treatment of chemically dependent adolescents: a 2-year outcome study. Journal of Studies on Alcohol. 52:(2):1991;118-126.
2. Biglan A., Hood D., Brozovsky P., Ochs L., Ary D., Black C. Subject attrition in prevention research. NIDA Research Monograph#107, DHHS Publication#ADM 91-1761. 1991;National Institute on Drug Abuse, Rockville, MD.
3. Capaldi D., Patterson G.R. An approach to the problem of recruitment and retention rates for longitudinal research. Behavioral Assessment. 9:1987;169-177.
4. Cauce A.M., Ryan K.D., Grove K. Children and adolescents of color, where are you?: participation, selection, and retention in developmental research. McLoyd V.C., Steinberg L. Studying Minority Adolescents: Conceptual, Methodological, and Theoretical Issues. 1998;Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey.
5. Clarridge B.R., Sheehy L.L., Hausen T.S. Tracing members of a panel: a 17 year follow-up study. Schuessler K.F. Sociological Methodology. 1977;185-203 Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
6. Cook T.D., Campbell D.T. The Conduct of Randomized Experiments. In Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings. 1979;341-386 Houghton Mifflin, Boston.
7. Cottler L.B., Compton W.M., Ben-Abdallah A., Horne M., Claverie D. Achieving a 96.6 percent follow-up rate in a longitudinal study of drug abusers. Drug and Alcohol Dependence. 41:1996;209-217.
8. Deas D., Riggs P., Langenbucher M., Goldman M., Brown S. Adolescents are not adults: developmental considerations in alcohol users. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research. 24:2000;232-237.
9. Desmond D.P., Maddux J.F., Johnson T.H., Confer B.A. Obtaining follow-up interviews for treatment evaluation. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 12:(2):1995;95-102.
10. Ellickson P.L., Bianca D., Schoeff D.C. Containing attrition in school-based research: an innovative approach. Evaluation Review. 12:(4):1988;331-351.
11. Farrington D.P., Gallagher B., Morley L., St. Ledger R.J., West D.J. Minimizing attrition in longitudinal research: methods of tracing and securing cooperation in a 24-year follow-up study. Magnusson D., Bergman L.R. Data Quality in Longitudinal Research. 1990;Cambridge University Press, New York, NY.
12. Festinger, D., 2001. Personal communication re: NIDA grant to study attrition. Treatment Research Institute, Philadelphia.
13. Gregory M.M., Lohr M.J., Gilchrist L.D. Methods for tracking pregnant and parenting adolescents. Evaluation Review. 17:(1):1992;69-80.
14. Grenier C. Treatment effectiveness in an adolescent chemical dependency treatment program: a quasi-experimental design. International Journal of the Addictions. 20:1985;381-391.
15. Gwadz M., Rotheram-Borus M.J. Tracking high-risk adolescents longitudinally. AIDS Education and Prevention. (Suppl.):1992;69-82.
16. Hansen W.B., Collins L.M., Malotte C.K., Johnson C.A., Fielding J.E. Attrition in prevention research. Journal of Behavioral Medicine. 8:1985;261-275.
17. Hansen W.B., Tobler N.S., Graham J.W. Attrition in substance abuse prevention research: a meta-analysis of 85 longitudinally followed cohorts. Evaluation Review. 14:1990;677-685.
18. Harrison P.A., Hoffman N. CATOR report: Adolescent treatment completers one year later. 1989;Chemical Abuse/Addiction Treatment Outcome Registry, St. Paul, MN.
19. Jemmott J.B. III, Jemmott L.S. Interventions for adolescents in community settings. DiClemente R.J., Peterson J.L. Preventing AIDS: Theories and Methods of Behavioral Interventions. 1994;Plenum Press, New York.
20. Keskinen S. Hazelden Pioneer House: 1984 Profile of six-month and 12-month Outcomes. 1986;Hazelden, Center City, MN.
21. Marmor J.K., Oliveria S.A., Donahue R.P., Garrahie E.J., White M.J., Moore L.L., Ellison R.C. Factors encouraging cohort maintenance in a longitudinal study. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 44:1991;531-535.
22. Meyers, K., Hagan, T.A., McDermott, P., Webb, A., Randall, M., Frantz, J. Design and validation of clinical dimensions for the Comprehensive Adolescent Severity Inventory (CASI) submitted for publication.
23. Meyers K., McLellan A.T., Jaeger J.L., Pettinati H.M. The development of the Comprehensive Addiction Severity Index for Adolescents (CASI-A). Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 12:(3):1995;181-193.
24. Meyers, K., Webb, A., Randall, M., McDermott, P., Mulvaney, F., Tucker, W., McLellan, A.T., 1999a. Psychometric properties of the Comprehensive Adolescent Severity Inventory (CASI). National Institute on Drug Abuse Research Monograph #179: Problems of Drug Dependence, Proceedings of the 60th Annual Scientific Meeting, College on Problems of Drug Dependence, 83.
25. Meyers K., Hagan T.A., Zanis D., Webb A., Frantz J., Ring-Kurtz S., Rutherford M., McLellan A.T. Critical issues in adolescent substance abuse assessment. Drug and Alcohol Dependence. 55:1999b;40-46.
26. Ribisl K.M., Walton M.A., Mowbray C.T., Luke D.A., Davidson W.S. II, Bootsmiller B.J. Minimizing participant attrition in panel studies through the use of effective retention and tracking strategies: review and recommendations. Evaluation and Program Planning. 19:(1):1996;1-25.
27. Scott, C.K., Dennis, M.L., 2000. An effective model for achieving 90%+ follow-up with substance abuse treatment clients. Poster presented at the 62nd annual meeting of the College of Problems of Drug Dependence (CPDD), Arizona.
28. Scott C.K., Dennis M.L. Illinois Health Survey Laboratory Adolescent Follow-up Manual. 1998;Chestnut Health Systems, Chicago, IL.
29. Stinchfield R.D., Niforopulos L., Feder S.H. Follow-up contact bias in adolescent substance abuse treatment outcome research. Journal of Studies on Alcohol. 55:(3):1994;285-289.
30. Stinchfield R.D., Owen P. Hazelden's model of treatment and its outcome. Addictive Behaviors. 23:1998;669-683.
31. Walton M.A., Ramanathan C.S., Reischl T.M. Tracking substance abusers in longitudinal research: Understanding follow-up contact difficulty. American Journal of Community Psychology. 26:1998;233-253.
32. Winters K.C., Stinchfield R., Opland E., Weller C., Latimer W.W. The effectiveness of the Minnesota Model approach in the treatment of adolescent drug abusers. Addiction. 95:2000;601-612.
33. Young S.E., Mikulich S.K., Goodwin M.B., Hardy J., Martin C.L., Zoccolillo M.S., Crowley T.J. Treated delinquent boys' substance use: onset, pattern, relationship to conduct and mood disorders. Drug and Alcohol Dependence. 37:1995;149-162.