Alcoholics Anonymous and other 12-step programs for alcohol use disorder
Alcohol use disorder (AUD) confers a prodigious burden of disease, disability, premature mortality, and high economic costs from lost productivity, accidents, violence, incarceration, and increased healthcare utilization. For over 80 years, Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) has been a widespread AUD recover...
Uložené v:
| Vydané v: | Cochrane database of systematic reviews Ročník 3; s. CD012880 |
|---|---|
| Hlavní autori: | , , |
| Médium: | Journal Article |
| Jazyk: | English |
| Vydavateľské údaje: |
England
11.03.2020
|
| Predmet: | |
| ISSN: | 1469-493X, 1469-493X |
| On-line prístup: | Zistit podrobnosti o prístupe |
| Tagy: |
Pridať tag
Žiadne tagy, Buďte prvý, kto otaguje tento záznam!
|
| Abstract | Alcohol use disorder (AUD) confers a prodigious burden of disease, disability, premature mortality, and high economic costs from lost productivity, accidents, violence, incarceration, and increased healthcare utilization. For over 80 years, Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) has been a widespread AUD recovery organization, with millions of members and treatment free at the point of access, but it is only recently that rigorous research on its effectiveness has been conducted.
To evaluate whether peer-led AA and professionally-delivered treatments that facilitate AA involvement (Twelve-Step Facilitation (TSF) interventions) achieve important outcomes, specifically: abstinence, reduced drinking intensity, reduced alcohol-related consequences, alcohol addiction severity, and healthcare cost offsets.
We searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialized Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO from inception to 2 August 2019. We searched for ongoing and unpublished studies via ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) on 15 November 2018. All searches included non-English language literature. We handsearched references of topic-related systematic reviews and bibliographies of included studies.
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs and non-randomized studies that compared AA or TSF (AA/TSF) with other interventions, such as motivational enhancement therapy (MET) or cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), TSF treatment variants, or no treatment. We also included healthcare cost offset studies. Participants were non-coerced adults with AUD.
We categorized studies by: study design (RCT/quasi-RCT; non-randomized; economic); degree of standardized manualization (all interventions manualized versus some/none); and comparison intervention type (i.e. whether AA/TSF was compared to an intervention with a different theoretical orientation or an AA/TSF intervention that varied in style or intensity). For analyses, we followed Cochrane methodology calculating the standard mean difference (SMD) for continuous variables (e.g. percent days abstinent (PDA)) or the relative risk (risk ratios (RRs)) for dichotomous variables. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses to pool effects wherever possible.
We included 27 studies containing 10,565 participants (21 RCTs/quasi-RCTs, 5 non-randomized, and 1 purely economic study). The average age of participants within studies ranged from 34.2 to 51.0 years. AA/TSF was compared with psychological clinical interventions, such as MET and CBT, and other 12-step program variants. We rated selection bias as being at high risk in 11 of the 27 included studies, unclear in three, and as low risk in 13. We rated risk of attrition bias as high risk in nine studies, unclear in 14, and low in four, due to moderate (> 20%) attrition rates in the study overall (8 studies), or in study treatment group (1 study). Risk of bias due to inadequate researcher blinding was high in one study, unclear in 22, and low in four. Risks of bias arising from the remaining domains were predominantly low or unclear. AA/TSF (manualized) compared to treatments with a different theoretical orientation (e.g. CBT) (randomized/quasi-randomized evidence) RCTs comparing manualized AA/TSF to other clinical interventions (e.g. CBT), showed AA/TSF improves rates of continuous abstinence at 12 months (risk ratio (RR) 1.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 1.42; 2 studies, 1936 participants; high-certainty evidence). This effect remained consistent at both 24 and 36 months. For percentage days abstinent (PDA), AA/TSF appears to perform as well as other clinical interventions at 12 months (mean difference (MD) 3.03, 95% CI -4.36 to 10.43; 4 studies, 1999 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and better at 24 months (MD 12.91, 95% CI 7.55 to 18.29; 2 studies, 302 participants; low-certainty evidence) and 36 months (MD 6.64, 95% CI 1.54 to 11.75; 1 study, 806 participants; low-certainty evidence). For longest period of abstinence (LPA), AA/TSF may perform as well as comparison interventions at six months (MD 0.60, 95% CI -0.30 to 1.50; 2 studies, 136 participants; low-certainty evidence). For drinking intensity, AA/TSF may perform as well as other clinical interventions at 12 months, as measured by drinks per drinking day (DDD) (MD -0.17, 95% CI -1.11 to 0.77; 1 study, 1516 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and percentage days heavy drinking (PDHD) (MD -5.51, 95% CI -14.15 to 3.13; 1 study, 91 participants; low-certainty evidence). For alcohol-related consequences, AA/TSF probably performs as well as other clinical interventions at 12 months (MD -2.88, 95% CI -6.81 to 1.04; 3 studies, 1762 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). For alcohol addiction severity, one study found evidence of a difference in favor of AA/TSF at 12 months (P < 0.05; low-certainty evidence). AA/TSF (non-manualized) compared to treatments with a different theoretical orientation (e.g. CBT) (randomized/quasi-randomized evidence) For the proportion of participants completely abstinent, non-manualized AA/TSF may perform as well as other clinical interventions at three to nine months follow-up (RR 1.71, 95% CI 0.70 to 4.18; 1 study, 93 participants; low-certainty evidence). Non-manualized AA/TSF may also perform slightly better than other clinical interventions for PDA (MD 3.00, 95% CI 0.31 to 5.69; 1 study, 93 participants; low-certainty evidence). For drinking intensity, AA/TSF may perform as well as other clinical interventions at nine months, as measured by DDD (MD -1.76, 95% CI -2.23 to -1.29; 1 study, 93 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and PDHD (MD 2.09, 95% CI -1.24 to 5.42; 1 study, 286 participants; low-certainty evidence). None of the RCTs comparing non-manualized AA/TSF to other clinical interventions assessed LPA, alcohol-related consequences, or alcohol addiction severity. Cost-effectiveness studies In three studies, AA/TSF had higher healthcare cost savings than outpatient treatment, CBT, and no AA/TSF treatment. The fourth study found that total medical care costs decreased for participants attending CBT, MET, and AA/TSF treatment, but that among participants with worse prognostic characteristics AA/TSF had higher potential cost savings than MET (moderate-certainty evidence).
There is high quality evidence that manualized AA/TSF interventions are more effective than other established treatments, such as CBT, for increasing abstinence. Non-manualized AA/TSF may perform as well as these other established treatments. AA/TSF interventions, both manualized and non-manualized, may be at least as effective as other treatments for other alcohol-related outcomes. AA/TSF probably produces substantial healthcare cost savings among people with alcohol use disorder. |
|---|---|
| AbstractList | Alcohol use disorder (AUD) confers a prodigious burden of disease, disability, premature mortality, and high economic costs from lost productivity, accidents, violence, incarceration, and increased healthcare utilization. For over 80 years, Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) has been a widespread AUD recovery organization, with millions of members and treatment free at the point of access, but it is only recently that rigorous research on its effectiveness has been conducted.
To evaluate whether peer-led AA and professionally-delivered treatments that facilitate AA involvement (Twelve-Step Facilitation (TSF) interventions) achieve important outcomes, specifically: abstinence, reduced drinking intensity, reduced alcohol-related consequences, alcohol addiction severity, and healthcare cost offsets.
We searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialized Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO from inception to 2 August 2019. We searched for ongoing and unpublished studies via ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) on 15 November 2018. All searches included non-English language literature. We handsearched references of topic-related systematic reviews and bibliographies of included studies.
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs and non-randomized studies that compared AA or TSF (AA/TSF) with other interventions, such as motivational enhancement therapy (MET) or cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), TSF treatment variants, or no treatment. We also included healthcare cost offset studies. Participants were non-coerced adults with AUD.
We categorized studies by: study design (RCT/quasi-RCT; non-randomized; economic); degree of standardized manualization (all interventions manualized versus some/none); and comparison intervention type (i.e. whether AA/TSF was compared to an intervention with a different theoretical orientation or an AA/TSF intervention that varied in style or intensity). For analyses, we followed Cochrane methodology calculating the standard mean difference (SMD) for continuous variables (e.g. percent days abstinent (PDA)) or the relative risk (risk ratios (RRs)) for dichotomous variables. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses to pool effects wherever possible.
We included 27 studies containing 10,565 participants (21 RCTs/quasi-RCTs, 5 non-randomized, and 1 purely economic study). The average age of participants within studies ranged from 34.2 to 51.0 years. AA/TSF was compared with psychological clinical interventions, such as MET and CBT, and other 12-step program variants. We rated selection bias as being at high risk in 11 of the 27 included studies, unclear in three, and as low risk in 13. We rated risk of attrition bias as high risk in nine studies, unclear in 14, and low in four, due to moderate (> 20%) attrition rates in the study overall (8 studies), or in study treatment group (1 study). Risk of bias due to inadequate researcher blinding was high in one study, unclear in 22, and low in four. Risks of bias arising from the remaining domains were predominantly low or unclear. AA/TSF (manualized) compared to treatments with a different theoretical orientation (e.g. CBT) (randomized/quasi-randomized evidence) RCTs comparing manualized AA/TSF to other clinical interventions (e.g. CBT), showed AA/TSF improves rates of continuous abstinence at 12 months (risk ratio (RR) 1.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 1.42; 2 studies, 1936 participants; high-certainty evidence). This effect remained consistent at both 24 and 36 months. For percentage days abstinent (PDA), AA/TSF appears to perform as well as other clinical interventions at 12 months (mean difference (MD) 3.03, 95% CI -4.36 to 10.43; 4 studies, 1999 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and better at 24 months (MD 12.91, 95% CI 7.55 to 18.29; 2 studies, 302 participants; low-certainty evidence) and 36 months (MD 6.64, 95% CI 1.54 to 11.75; 1 study, 806 participants; low-certainty evidence). For longest period of abstinence (LPA), AA/TSF may perform as well as comparison interventions at six months (MD 0.60, 95% CI -0.30 to 1.50; 2 studies, 136 participants; low-certainty evidence). For drinking intensity, AA/TSF may perform as well as other clinical interventions at 12 months, as measured by drinks per drinking day (DDD) (MD -0.17, 95% CI -1.11 to 0.77; 1 study, 1516 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and percentage days heavy drinking (PDHD) (MD -5.51, 95% CI -14.15 to 3.13; 1 study, 91 participants; low-certainty evidence). For alcohol-related consequences, AA/TSF probably performs as well as other clinical interventions at 12 months (MD -2.88, 95% CI -6.81 to 1.04; 3 studies, 1762 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). For alcohol addiction severity, one study found evidence of a difference in favor of AA/TSF at 12 months (P < 0.05; low-certainty evidence). AA/TSF (non-manualized) compared to treatments with a different theoretical orientation (e.g. CBT) (randomized/quasi-randomized evidence) For the proportion of participants completely abstinent, non-manualized AA/TSF may perform as well as other clinical interventions at three to nine months follow-up (RR 1.71, 95% CI 0.70 to 4.18; 1 study, 93 participants; low-certainty evidence). Non-manualized AA/TSF may also perform slightly better than other clinical interventions for PDA (MD 3.00, 95% CI 0.31 to 5.69; 1 study, 93 participants; low-certainty evidence). For drinking intensity, AA/TSF may perform as well as other clinical interventions at nine months, as measured by DDD (MD -1.76, 95% CI -2.23 to -1.29; 1 study, 93 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and PDHD (MD 2.09, 95% CI -1.24 to 5.42; 1 study, 286 participants; low-certainty evidence). None of the RCTs comparing non-manualized AA/TSF to other clinical interventions assessed LPA, alcohol-related consequences, or alcohol addiction severity. Cost-effectiveness studies In three studies, AA/TSF had higher healthcare cost savings than outpatient treatment, CBT, and no AA/TSF treatment. The fourth study found that total medical care costs decreased for participants attending CBT, MET, and AA/TSF treatment, but that among participants with worse prognostic characteristics AA/TSF had higher potential cost savings than MET (moderate-certainty evidence).
There is high quality evidence that manualized AA/TSF interventions are more effective than other established treatments, such as CBT, for increasing abstinence. Non-manualized AA/TSF may perform as well as these other established treatments. AA/TSF interventions, both manualized and non-manualized, may be at least as effective as other treatments for other alcohol-related outcomes. AA/TSF probably produces substantial healthcare cost savings among people with alcohol use disorder. Alcohol use disorder (AUD) confers a prodigious burden of disease, disability, premature mortality, and high economic costs from lost productivity, accidents, violence, incarceration, and increased healthcare utilization. For over 80 years, Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) has been a widespread AUD recovery organization, with millions of members and treatment free at the point of access, but it is only recently that rigorous research on its effectiveness has been conducted.BACKGROUNDAlcohol use disorder (AUD) confers a prodigious burden of disease, disability, premature mortality, and high economic costs from lost productivity, accidents, violence, incarceration, and increased healthcare utilization. For over 80 years, Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) has been a widespread AUD recovery organization, with millions of members and treatment free at the point of access, but it is only recently that rigorous research on its effectiveness has been conducted.To evaluate whether peer-led AA and professionally-delivered treatments that facilitate AA involvement (Twelve-Step Facilitation (TSF) interventions) achieve important outcomes, specifically: abstinence, reduced drinking intensity, reduced alcohol-related consequences, alcohol addiction severity, and healthcare cost offsets.OBJECTIVESTo evaluate whether peer-led AA and professionally-delivered treatments that facilitate AA involvement (Twelve-Step Facilitation (TSF) interventions) achieve important outcomes, specifically: abstinence, reduced drinking intensity, reduced alcohol-related consequences, alcohol addiction severity, and healthcare cost offsets.We searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialized Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO from inception to 2 August 2019. We searched for ongoing and unpublished studies via ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) on 15 November 2018. All searches included non-English language literature. We handsearched references of topic-related systematic reviews and bibliographies of included studies.SEARCH METHODSWe searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialized Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO from inception to 2 August 2019. We searched for ongoing and unpublished studies via ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) on 15 November 2018. All searches included non-English language literature. We handsearched references of topic-related systematic reviews and bibliographies of included studies.We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs and non-randomized studies that compared AA or TSF (AA/TSF) with other interventions, such as motivational enhancement therapy (MET) or cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), TSF treatment variants, or no treatment. We also included healthcare cost offset studies. Participants were non-coerced adults with AUD.SELECTION CRITERIAWe included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs and non-randomized studies that compared AA or TSF (AA/TSF) with other interventions, such as motivational enhancement therapy (MET) or cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), TSF treatment variants, or no treatment. We also included healthcare cost offset studies. Participants were non-coerced adults with AUD.We categorized studies by: study design (RCT/quasi-RCT; non-randomized; economic); degree of standardized manualization (all interventions manualized versus some/none); and comparison intervention type (i.e. whether AA/TSF was compared to an intervention with a different theoretical orientation or an AA/TSF intervention that varied in style or intensity). For analyses, we followed Cochrane methodology calculating the standard mean difference (SMD) for continuous variables (e.g. percent days abstinent (PDA)) or the relative risk (risk ratios (RRs)) for dichotomous variables. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses to pool effects wherever possible.DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSISWe categorized studies by: study design (RCT/quasi-RCT; non-randomized; economic); degree of standardized manualization (all interventions manualized versus some/none); and comparison intervention type (i.e. whether AA/TSF was compared to an intervention with a different theoretical orientation or an AA/TSF intervention that varied in style or intensity). For analyses, we followed Cochrane methodology calculating the standard mean difference (SMD) for continuous variables (e.g. percent days abstinent (PDA)) or the relative risk (risk ratios (RRs)) for dichotomous variables. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses to pool effects wherever possible.We included 27 studies containing 10,565 participants (21 RCTs/quasi-RCTs, 5 non-randomized, and 1 purely economic study). The average age of participants within studies ranged from 34.2 to 51.0 years. AA/TSF was compared with psychological clinical interventions, such as MET and CBT, and other 12-step program variants. We rated selection bias as being at high risk in 11 of the 27 included studies, unclear in three, and as low risk in 13. We rated risk of attrition bias as high risk in nine studies, unclear in 14, and low in four, due to moderate (> 20%) attrition rates in the study overall (8 studies), or in study treatment group (1 study). Risk of bias due to inadequate researcher blinding was high in one study, unclear in 22, and low in four. Risks of bias arising from the remaining domains were predominantly low or unclear. AA/TSF (manualized) compared to treatments with a different theoretical orientation (e.g. CBT) (randomized/quasi-randomized evidence) RCTs comparing manualized AA/TSF to other clinical interventions (e.g. CBT), showed AA/TSF improves rates of continuous abstinence at 12 months (risk ratio (RR) 1.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 1.42; 2 studies, 1936 participants; high-certainty evidence). This effect remained consistent at both 24 and 36 months. For percentage days abstinent (PDA), AA/TSF appears to perform as well as other clinical interventions at 12 months (mean difference (MD) 3.03, 95% CI -4.36 to 10.43; 4 studies, 1999 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and better at 24 months (MD 12.91, 95% CI 7.55 to 18.29; 2 studies, 302 participants; low-certainty evidence) and 36 months (MD 6.64, 95% CI 1.54 to 11.75; 1 study, 806 participants; low-certainty evidence). For longest period of abstinence (LPA), AA/TSF may perform as well as comparison interventions at six months (MD 0.60, 95% CI -0.30 to 1.50; 2 studies, 136 participants; low-certainty evidence). For drinking intensity, AA/TSF may perform as well as other clinical interventions at 12 months, as measured by drinks per drinking day (DDD) (MD -0.17, 95% CI -1.11 to 0.77; 1 study, 1516 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and percentage days heavy drinking (PDHD) (MD -5.51, 95% CI -14.15 to 3.13; 1 study, 91 participants; low-certainty evidence). For alcohol-related consequences, AA/TSF probably performs as well as other clinical interventions at 12 months (MD -2.88, 95% CI -6.81 to 1.04; 3 studies, 1762 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). For alcohol addiction severity, one study found evidence of a difference in favor of AA/TSF at 12 months (P < 0.05; low-certainty evidence). AA/TSF (non-manualized) compared to treatments with a different theoretical orientation (e.g. CBT) (randomized/quasi-randomized evidence) For the proportion of participants completely abstinent, non-manualized AA/TSF may perform as well as other clinical interventions at three to nine months follow-up (RR 1.71, 95% CI 0.70 to 4.18; 1 study, 93 participants; low-certainty evidence). Non-manualized AA/TSF may also perform slightly better than other clinical interventions for PDA (MD 3.00, 95% CI 0.31 to 5.69; 1 study, 93 participants; low-certainty evidence). For drinking intensity, AA/TSF may perform as well as other clinical interventions at nine months, as measured by DDD (MD -1.76, 95% CI -2.23 to -1.29; 1 study, 93 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and PDHD (MD 2.09, 95% CI -1.24 to 5.42; 1 study, 286 participants; low-certainty evidence). None of the RCTs comparing non-manualized AA/TSF to other clinical interventions assessed LPA, alcohol-related consequences, or alcohol addiction severity. Cost-effectiveness studies In three studies, AA/TSF had higher healthcare cost savings than outpatient treatment, CBT, and no AA/TSF treatment. The fourth study found that total medical care costs decreased for participants attending CBT, MET, and AA/TSF treatment, but that among participants with worse prognostic characteristics AA/TSF had higher potential cost savings than MET (moderate-certainty evidence).MAIN RESULTSWe included 27 studies containing 10,565 participants (21 RCTs/quasi-RCTs, 5 non-randomized, and 1 purely economic study). The average age of participants within studies ranged from 34.2 to 51.0 years. AA/TSF was compared with psychological clinical interventions, such as MET and CBT, and other 12-step program variants. We rated selection bias as being at high risk in 11 of the 27 included studies, unclear in three, and as low risk in 13. We rated risk of attrition bias as high risk in nine studies, unclear in 14, and low in four, due to moderate (> 20%) attrition rates in the study overall (8 studies), or in study treatment group (1 study). Risk of bias due to inadequate researcher blinding was high in one study, unclear in 22, and low in four. Risks of bias arising from the remaining domains were predominantly low or unclear. AA/TSF (manualized) compared to treatments with a different theoretical orientation (e.g. CBT) (randomized/quasi-randomized evidence) RCTs comparing manualized AA/TSF to other clinical interventions (e.g. CBT), showed AA/TSF improves rates of continuous abstinence at 12 mo |
| Author | Kelly, John F Humphreys, Keith Ferri, Marica |
| Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: John F surname: Kelly fullname: Kelly, John F organization: Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Recovery Research Institute, Center for Addiction Medicine, 151 Merrimac Street, 6th Floor, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, 02114 – sequence: 2 givenname: Keith surname: Humphreys fullname: Humphreys, Keith organization: Stanford University Stanford School of Medicine, Veterans Affairs and Stanford University Medical Centers, 401 North Quarry Road, Stanford, CA, USA – sequence: 3 givenname: Marica surname: Ferri fullname: Ferri, Marica organization: European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, Best practices, knowledge exchange and economic issues, Cais do Sodre' 1249-289 Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal |
| BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32159228$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
| BookMark | eNpNT8lOwzAQtVARXeAXKh-5pNjjxMuxKkuRKnEBiVvkLTQoiYOdHPr3RGqROM2M5q1LNOtC5xFaU7KhhMADzXlBZSE3u0dCQUqy6UcDV2gxPVSWK_Y5-7fP0TKlb0KYolTeoDkDWigAuUD7bWPDMTS1TXg7eZzaMCasO4fDcPQRU8jS4Hvcx_AVdZtwFSLWZw4ek8euTiE6H2_RdaWb5O8uc4U-np_ed_vs8PbyutseMpsLBhmroJBQOEtpZYXzoBUznEOeK-2J1QSI5MIowjgXxE1XJZygihuhlTUGVuj-rDsl-hl9Gsq2TtY3je78FL0EJjjAVJNO0PUFOprWu7KPdavjqfxrD78NHF69 |
| CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1080_15228878_2024_2310634 crossref_primary_10_1080_10550887_2022_2149233 crossref_primary_10_1111_1468_5922_13096 crossref_primary_10_1007_s44202_024_00151_4 crossref_primary_10_1093_alcalc_agaa137 crossref_primary_10_1093_alcalc_agaf027 crossref_primary_10_1007_s10943_021_01193_x crossref_primary_10_1007_s12671_024_02355_0 crossref_primary_10_1080_10538720_2023_2266385 crossref_primary_10_1093_alcalc_agaf023 crossref_primary_10_1038_s41409_022_01711_9 crossref_primary_10_3389_fpsyt_2024_1486278 crossref_primary_10_1001_jamanetworkopen_2023_23741 crossref_primary_10_3389_fpubh_2020_557275 crossref_primary_10_2196_54438 crossref_primary_10_1186_s13722_023_00406_w crossref_primary_10_1080_14659891_2024_2395514 crossref_primary_10_1080_09515089_2024_2384592 crossref_primary_10_1007_s40429_025_00635_w crossref_primary_10_1016_j_addbeh_2021_106945 crossref_primary_10_1007_s10943_024_02060_1 crossref_primary_10_3280_mis69_2025oa19920 crossref_primary_10_1161_STR_0000000000000475 crossref_primary_10_1080_07347324_2025_2491343 crossref_primary_10_1007_s10943_023_01892_7 crossref_primary_10_1007_s10620_024_08601_8 crossref_primary_10_1080_10826084_2025_2519404 crossref_primary_10_3389_fmed_2024_1409392 crossref_primary_10_1007_s10943_022_01609_2 crossref_primary_10_7759_cureus_37443 crossref_primary_10_1002_14651858_CD015673_pub2 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11469_021_00737_2 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11606_021_06904_4 crossref_primary_10_1007_s40429_021_00388_2 crossref_primary_10_1093_alcalc_agaf013 crossref_primary_10_1136_bmj_m1056 crossref_primary_10_2147_SAR_S375653 crossref_primary_10_2196_49010 crossref_primary_10_23947_2658_7165_2024_7_6_17_26 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_addbeh_2021_107232 crossref_primary_10_1080_10550887_2024_2331528 crossref_primary_10_1080_10538720_2023_2172759 crossref_primary_10_1080_07347324_2024_2347241 crossref_primary_10_1177_10497323211041109 crossref_primary_10_2147_SAR_S391636 crossref_primary_10_1007_s40429_025_00645_8 crossref_primary_10_1080_00952990_2025_2509106 crossref_primary_10_2196_25217 crossref_primary_10_1080_10826084_2023_2269570 crossref_primary_10_1080_14659891_2023_2275013 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11606_020_06454_1 crossref_primary_10_1080_07347324_2020_1846478 crossref_primary_10_1002_jad_12119 crossref_primary_10_7759_cureus_55466 crossref_primary_10_1145_3494955 crossref_primary_10_1002_ajcp_12568 crossref_primary_10_1080_15332640_2025_2472342 crossref_primary_10_7326_AITC202210180 crossref_primary_10_1017_S1352465822000042 crossref_primary_10_1007_s40429_024_00563_1 crossref_primary_10_1038_s41598_025_92029_1 crossref_primary_10_4236_health_2022_146050 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11469_023_01012_2 crossref_primary_10_3917_psyt_312_0041 crossref_primary_10_1080_00952990_2024_2350056 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11469_025_01543_w crossref_primary_10_1002_casp_2770 crossref_primary_10_1111_add_16751 crossref_primary_10_1007_s10654_022_00883_4 crossref_primary_10_1136_bmjopen_2022_066898 crossref_primary_10_3389_fpubh_2025_1630084 crossref_primary_10_2196_38894 crossref_primary_10_1136_bmjopen_2022_066019 crossref_primary_10_3389_fpsyg_2021_657944 crossref_primary_10_1080_14659891_2024_2356571 crossref_primary_10_1111_1468_5922_13027 crossref_primary_10_1002_14651858_CD011866_pub3 crossref_primary_10_18863_pgy_1271849 crossref_primary_10_1136_bmj_2023_077090 crossref_primary_10_3389_fpsyt_2025_1612551 crossref_primary_10_1080_07347324_2022_2102456 crossref_primary_10_1007_s42844_024_00155_y crossref_primary_10_1145_3517144 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11606_024_08642_9 crossref_primary_10_1136_bmj_n5 crossref_primary_10_1080_10826084_2022_2125276 crossref_primary_10_1891_JCP_2022_0038 crossref_primary_10_1007_s40265_023_01939_9 |
| ContentType | Journal Article |
| Copyright | Copyright © 2020 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. |
| Copyright_xml | – notice: Copyright © 2020 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. |
| DBID | CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 7X8 |
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.CD012880.pub2 |
| DatabaseName | Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed MEDLINE - Academic |
| DatabaseTitle | MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE - Academic |
| DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE MEDLINE - Academic |
| Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 2 dbid: 7X8 name: MEDLINE - Academic url: https://search.proquest.com/medline sourceTypes: Aggregation Database |
| DeliveryMethod | no_fulltext_linktorsrc |
| Discipline | Medicine |
| EISSN | 1469-493X |
| ExternalDocumentID | 32159228 |
| Genre | Meta-Analysis Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Systematic Review Journal Article Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural |
| GrantInformation_xml | – fundername: NIAAA NIH HHS grantid: K24 AA022136 |
| GroupedDBID | --- 53G 5GY 7PX 9HA ABJNI ACGFO ACGFS AENEX ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS ALUQN AYR CGR CUY CVF D7G ECM EIF HYE NPM OEC OK1 P2P RWY WOW ZYTZH 7X8 |
| ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c4732-3f25825dc11fc7de2a93b662449ae0ca020867b9036670d208f7d7196b7a9cbb2 |
| IEDL.DBID | 7X8 |
| ISICitedReferencesCount | 279 |
| ISICitedReferencesURI | http://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=Summon&SrcAuth=ProQuest&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=WOS_CPL&KeyUT=000522683100026&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| ISSN | 1469-493X |
| IngestDate | Fri Jul 11 11:23:04 EDT 2025 Thu Jan 02 22:55:32 EST 2025 |
| IsDoiOpenAccess | false |
| IsOpenAccess | true |
| IsPeerReviewed | true |
| IsScholarly | true |
| Language | English |
| License | Copyright © 2020 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. |
| LinkModel | DirectLink |
| MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c4732-3f25825dc11fc7de2a93b662449ae0ca020867b9036670d208f7d7196b7a9cbb2 |
| Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 ObjectType-Undefined-3 |
| OpenAccessLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/7065341 |
| PMID | 32159228 |
| PQID | 2376221181 |
| PQPubID | 23479 |
| ParticipantIDs | proquest_miscellaneous_2376221181 pubmed_primary_32159228 |
| PublicationCentury | 2000 |
| PublicationDate | 2020-03-11 |
| PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2020-03-11 |
| PublicationDate_xml | – month: 03 year: 2020 text: 2020-03-11 day: 11 |
| PublicationDecade | 2020 |
| PublicationPlace | England |
| PublicationPlace_xml | – name: England |
| PublicationTitle | Cochrane database of systematic reviews |
| PublicationTitleAlternate | Cochrane Database Syst Rev |
| PublicationYear | 2020 |
| References | 33630540 - Am Fam Physician. 2021 Mar 1;103(5):272-273 |
| References_xml | – reference: 33630540 - Am Fam Physician. 2021 Mar 1;103(5):272-273 |
| SSID | ssj0039118 |
| Score | 2.6809115 |
| SecondaryResourceType | review_article |
| Snippet | Alcohol use disorder (AUD) confers a prodigious burden of disease, disability, premature mortality, and high economic costs from lost productivity, accidents,... |
| SourceID | proquest pubmed |
| SourceType | Aggregation Database Index Database |
| StartPage | CD012880 |
| SubjectTerms | Adult Alcoholics Anonymous Alcoholism - psychology Alcoholism - therapy Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Female Health Care Costs Humans Male Middle Aged Motivational Interviewing - methods Psychotherapy Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic Treatment Outcome |
| Title | Alcoholics Anonymous and other 12-step programs for alcohol use disorder |
| URI | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32159228 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2376221181 |
| Volume | 3 |
| WOSCitedRecordID | wos000522683100026&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| hasFullText | |
| inHoldings | 1 |
| isFullTextHit | |
| isPrint | |
| link | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV1JSwMxFA5qRby4L3UjgtfYTjIzSU5SqqUHW3pQmNuQbcBLrY76-31vJq0nQfAykMOD5M3b8pZ8hNykVniXJ4ZJqy1LVciYhUAYsV50UKBc0jaoJY9yOlVFoWcx4VbHtsqlTWwMtX91mCPvYfcG5zgmebd4Y4gahdXVCKGxTjoCQhmUalmsqggCFFm100WIpCaK5YRwn_cSxABXmbod3qOJVn08Pv89zGzczWj3vxvdIzsx0KSDVjL2yVqYH5CtSSylH5LxoAXHfXE1XeUAqJl72sxk0YQzEIAFjQ1cNYXolpqWhn7Wgfr4bucReR49PA3HLMIqMJdKwZmoeAb3Qu-SpHLSB260sHkOfl6b0HcGYTtz-HXg23LZ97CqpJegqVYa7azlx2QDthVOCTUOSDU3qXUuNam2SWalMlWqrM-DFF1yveRRCWKLtQgzD3Cc8odLXXLSMrpctO9rlALCEM25OvsD9TnZ5ngDxg675IJ0KlDacEk23dfHS_1-1cgDfKezyTdTf73k |
| linkProvider | ProQuest |
| openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Alcoholics+Anonymous+and+other+12-step+programs+for+alcohol+use+disorder&rft.jtitle=Cochrane+database+of+systematic+reviews&rft.au=Kelly%2C+John+F&rft.au=Humphreys%2C+Keith&rft.au=Ferri%2C+Marica&rft.date=2020-03-11&rft.eissn=1469-493X&rft.volume=3&rft.spage=CD012880&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002%2F14651858.CD012880.pub2&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F32159228&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F32159228&rft.externalDocID=32159228 |
| thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1469-493X&client=summon |
| thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1469-493X&client=summon |
| thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1469-493X&client=summon |