Daily telephone monitoring compared with retrospective recall of alcohol use among patients in early recovery

American Journal on Addictions

Volumn 20, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 63-68

  Simpson, Tracy L ^a,b,c,d,e   Galloway, Christopher ^f   Rosenthal, Christina F ^e   Bush, Kristen R ^b,c   McBride, Brittney ^b,c   Kivlahan, Daniel R ^a,b,c,d  

^a VISN 20 Mental Illness Research Education and Clinical Center   (United States)

^b Center of Excellence in Substance Abuse Treatment and Education   (United States)

^c VA PUGET SOUND HEALTH CARE SYSTEM   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^e Seattle Institute for Biomedical and Clinical Research   (United States)

^f SAN FRANCISCO VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRINKING; FEMALE; HELP SEEKING BEHAVIOR; HUMAN; INTERACTIVE VOICE RESPONSE SYSTEM; MALE; OUTPATIENT; POSTTRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER; RECALL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SELF MONITORING; TELEPHONE;

ALCOHOL DRINKING; ALCOHOLISM; DIAGNOSIS, DUAL (PSYCHIATRY); FEMALE; HUMANS; MENTAL RECALL; MIDDLE AGED; MONITORING, AMBULATORY; SELF REPORT; STRESS DISORDERS, POST-TRAUMATIC; TELEPHONE;

EID: 78650676375     PISSN: 10550496     EISSN: 15210391     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1521-0391.2010.00094.x     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Anton RE, Randall CL,. Measurement and choice of drinking outcome variables in the COMBINE Study. J Stud Alcohol Suppl. 2005; 66: 104-109.
2. Sobell LC, Sobell MB,. Alcohol consumption measures. In:, Allen JP, Wilson VB, eds. Assessing Alcohol Problems: A Guide for Clinicians and Researchers, 2nd ed. Washington, DC: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse & Alcoholism; 2003: 75-99.
3. Sobell LC, Sobell MB,. Timeline followback: A technique for assessing self-reported alcohol consumption. In:, Litten RZ, Allen JP, eds. Measuring Alcohol Consumption: Psychosocial and Biological Methods. Totowa, NJ: Humana Press; 1992: 41-71.
4. Miller WR, Del Boca FK,. Measurement of drinking behavior using the Form 90 family of instruments. J Stud Alcohol Suppl. 1994; 12: 112-118.
5. Tonigan JS, Miller WR, Brown JM,. The reliability of Form 90: An instrument for assessing alcohol treatment outcome. J Stud Alcohol. 1997; 58: 358-364.
6. Finney JW, Moyer A, Swearingen CE,. Outcome variables and their assessment in alcohol treatment studies: 1968-1998. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2003; 27: 1671-1679.
7. Shiffman S, Stone AA, Hufford MR,. Ecological momentary assessment. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2008; 4: 1-32.
8. Armeli S, Todd M, Mohr C,. A daily process approach to individual differences in stress-related alcohol use. J Pers. 2005; 73: 1-30.
9. Collins LM, Graham JW,. The effect of the timing and spacing of observations in longitudinal studies of tobacco and other drug use: Temporal design considerations. Drug Alcohol Depen. 2002; 68 (Suppl 1): 85-96.
10. McKay JR,. Studies of factors in relapse to alcohol, drug and nicotine use: A critical review of methodologies and findings. J Stud Alcohol. 1999; 60: 566-576.
11. Searles JS, Helzer JE, Rose GL, et al,. Concurrent and retrospective reports of alcohol consumption across 30, 90 and 366 days: Interactive voice response compared with the timeline followback. J Stud Alcohol. 2002; 63: 352-362.
12. Helzer JE, Badger GJ, Rose GL, et al,. Decline in alcohol consumption during two years of daily reporting. J Stud Alcohol. 2002; 63: 551-558.
13. Hufford MR, Shields AL, Shiffman S, et al,. Reactivity to ecological momentary assessment: An example using undergraduate problem drinkers. Psychol Addict Behav. 2002; 16: 205-211.
14. Ogborne AC, Annis HM,. The reactive effects of follow-up assessment procedures: An experimental study. Addict Behav. 1988; 13: 123-129.
15. Simpson TL, Kivlahan DR, Bush KR, et al,. Telephone self-monitoring among alcohol use disorder patients in early recovery: A randomized study of feasibility and measurement reactivity. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2005; 79: 241-250.
16. Rowan PJ, Cofta-Woerpel L, Mazas CA, et al,. Evaluating reactivity to ecological momentary assessment during smoking cessation. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2007; 15: 382-389.
17. Leigh BC,. Using daily reports to measure drinking and drinking patterns. J Subst Abuse. 2000; 12: 51-65.
18. Tucker JA, Foushee HR, Black BC, et al,. Agreement between prospective interactive voice response self-monitoring and structured retrospective reports of drinking and contextual variables during natural resolution attempts. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2007; 68: 538-542.
19. Kranzler HR, Abu-Hasaballah K, Tennen H, et al,. Using daily interactive voice response technology to measure drinking and related behaviors in a pharmacotherapy study. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2004; 28: 1060-1064.
20. Litt MD, Cooney NL, Morse P,. Reactivity to alcohol-related stimuli in the laboratory and in the field: Predictors of craving in treated alcoholics. Addiction. 2000; 95: 889-900.
21. Searles JS, Helzer JE, Walter DE,. Comparison of drinking patterns measured by daily reports and timeline follow back. Psychol Addict Behav. 2000; 14: 277-86.
22. Searles JS, Perrine MW, Mundt JC, et al,. Self-report of drinking using touch-tone telephone: Extending the limits of reliable daily contact. J Stud Alcohol. 1995; 56: 375-382.
23. Gerstel EK, Harford TC, Pautler C,. The reliability of drinking estimates obtained with two data collection methods. J Stud Alcohol. 1980; 41: 89-94.
24. Midanik LT, Klatsky AL, Armstrong MA,. A comparison of 7-day recall with two summary measures of alcohol use. Drug Alcohol Depend. 1989; 24: 127-134.
25. American Psychiatric Association. Task Force on DSM-IV. In: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-IV, 4th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 1994.
26. Saunders JB, Aasland OG, Babor TF, et al,. Development of the alcohol use disorders identification test (AUDIT): WHO Collaborative Project on early detection of persons with harmful alcohol consumption-II. Addiction. 1993; 88: 791-804.
27. Toll BA, Cooney NL, McKee SA, et al,. Correspondence between interactive voice response (IVR) and timeline followback (TLFB) reports of drinking behavior. Addict Behav. 2006; 31: 726-731.
28. Vinson DC, Reidinger C, Wilcosky T,. Factors affecting the validity of a timeline follow-back interview. J Stud Alcohol. 2003; 64: 733-740.
29. Midanik LT,. Perspectives on the validity of self-reported alcohol use. Brit J Addict. 1989; 84: 1419-1423.
30. Simpson TL, Saxon AJ, Meredith CW, et al,. A pilot trial of the alpha-1 adrenergic antagonist, prazosin, for alcohol dependence. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2009; 33: 255-263.
31. Korotitsch WJ, Nelson-Gray RO,. An overview of self-monitoring research in assessment and treatment. Psychol Assessment. 1999; 11: 415-425.