Substance abuse treatment, what do we know?

Machado, Matilde P.

doi:10.1007/s10198-004-0253-2

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Because federal funding has emphasized treatment, few data are available on the costs of substance abuse prevention programs (Andlin-Sobocki, 2004; French & Martin, 1996; Machado, 2005), even though the potential economic efficiency of well-developed prevention programs targeting substance abuse has been established (Miller & Hendrie, 2008). This study also addressed four of the Blue Ribbon Panel on Health Services Research’s recommendations for priorities in economic analyses of prevention programs (NIDA, 2004).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic Analysis of a Multi-Site Prevention Program: Assessment of Program Costs and Characterizing Site-level Variability

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Programmatic cost analyses of preventive interventions commonly have a number of methodological difficulties. To determine the mean total costs and properly characterize variability, one often has to deal with small sample sizes, skewed distributions, and especially missing data. Standard approaches for dealing with missing data such as multiple imputation may suffer from a small sample size, a lack of appropriate covariates, or too few details around the method used to handle the missing data. In this study, we estimate total programmatic costs for a prevention trial evaluating the Strong African American Families-Teen program. This intervention focuses on the prevention of substance abuse and risky sexual behavior. To account for missing data in the assessment of programmatic costs we compare multiple imputation to probabilistic sensitivity analysis. The latter approach uses collected cost data to create a distribution around each input parameter. We found that with the multiple imputation approach, the mean (95% confidence interval) incremental difference was $2149 ($397, $3901). With the probabilistic sensitivity analysis approach, the incremental difference was $2583 ($778, $4346). Although the true cost of the program is unknown, probabilistic sensitivity analysis may be a more viable alternative for capturing variability in estimates of programmatic costs when dealing with missing data, particularly with small sample sizes and the lack of strong predictor variables. Further, the larger standard errors produced by the probabilistic sensitivity analysis method may signal its ability to capture more of the variability in the data, thus better informing policymakers on the potentially true cost of the intervention.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic Analysis of a Multi-Site Prevention Program: Assessment of Program Costs and Characterizing Site-level Variability

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Interviews with organisation leaders, observation of neighbourhood centres' activities and a review of the broad literature on addiction recovery programmes (Kelly, Magill & Stout 2009;Machado 2005, among others) were the sources of information we used to identify the following five possible capability dimensions to be used in the evaluation of the Hogar de Cristo: (1) basic needs; (2) health;…”

Section: The Whole Person In Her Multiple Dimensionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spirituality and impact evaluation design: The case of an addiction recovery faith-based organisation in Argentina

Deneulin

Mitchell

2019

HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…(In 2013, the CVZ and its tasks merged into the newly established ‘Zorginstituut Nederland.’ The ‘Zorginstituut Nederland’ has the following tasks: the execution of insurances and the health basket, improving the quality of care, and renewing care professions and education). A detailed description of the benefits and entitlements in Dutch healthcare and how these are defined can be found in ‘The health basket in the Netherlands’ [30]. Regarding pharmaceuticals, the decision-making process is largely structured and involves an assessment phase and an appraisal phase [31,32].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating evidence on patient preferences in healthcare policy decisions: protocol of the patient-VIP study

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundDespite a strong movement towards active patient involvement in healthcare policy decisions, systematic and explicit consideration of evidence of this research on patient preferences seems limited. Furthermore, little is known about the opinions of several stakeholders towards consideration of research evidence on patient preferences in healthcare policy decisions. This paper describes the protocol for an explorative study on the integration of research on patient preferences in healthcare policy decisions. The study questions: to what extent research evidence on patient preferences is considered in current procedures for healthcare policy decisions; opinions of stakeholders regarding the integration of this type of evidence in healthcare policy decisions; and what could be a decision framework for the integration of such research evidence in healthcare policy decisions.Methods/designThe study is divided in three sub-studies, predominantly using qualitative methods. The first sub-study is a scoping review in five European countries to investigate whether and how results of research on patient preferences are considered in current procedures for coverage decisions and clinical practice guideline development. The second sub-study is a qualitative study to explore the opinions of stakeholders with regard to the possibilities for integrating evidence on patient preferences in the process of healthcare decision-making in the Netherlands. The third sub-study is the development of a decision framework for research on patient preferences. The framework will consist of: a process description regarding the place of evidence on patient preferences in the decision-making process; and a taxonomy describing different terminologies and conceptualisations of ‘preferences’ and an overview of existing methodologies for investigating preferences. The concept framework will be presented to and discussed with experts.DiscussionThis study will create awareness regarding the existence and potential value of research evidence on patient preferences for healthcare policy decision-making and provides insight in the methods for investigating patient preferences and the barriers and facilitators for integration of such research in healthcare policy decisions. Results of the study will be useful for researchers, clinical practice guideline developers, healthcare policy makers, and patient representatives.

show abstract

Substance abuse treatment, what do we know?

Abstract: Substance abuse, Alcohol misuse, Survey, Treatment evaluation, Effectiveness,

Cited by 7 publications

References 52 publications

Economic Analysis of a Multi-Site Prevention Program: Assessment of Program Costs and Characterizing Site-level Variability

Economic Analysis of a Multi-Site Prevention Program: Assessment of Program Costs and Characterizing Site-level Variability

Spirituality and impact evaluation design: The case of an addiction recovery faith-based organisation in Argentina

Integrating evidence on patient preferences in healthcare policy decisions: protocol of the patient-VIP study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About