Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Feb 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Subst Abuse Treat. 2012 Jul 2;44(2):145–158. doi: 10.1016/j.jsat.2012.05.006

Table 2. Mean Covariate Adjusted Posttest Effect Sizes and 95% Confidence Intervals for Each Treatment Category versus Available Comparison Conditions.

Treatment Combination k n Mean 95% CI
Behavioral Therapy
 vs. CBT 1 1 −.67 (−1.35, .02)
 vs. Family 1 2 −.01 (−5.56, 5.53)
 vs. MET/CBT 1 2 .36 (−1.45, 2.16)
 vs. Practice as usual 1 6 −.01 (−.45, .43)
 vs. All of the above 4 11 .00 (−.52, .53)
Family Therapy
 vs. Behavioral 1 2 .01 (−5.53, 5.56)
 vs. CBT 3 12 .53 (−.30, 1.36)
 vs. Group and mixed counseling 7 24 .32* (.18, .47)
 vs. MET/CBT 5 10 .11 (−.32, .55)
 vs. PET 5 14 .45* (.02, .88)
 vs. Practice as usual 4 26 .09 (−.27, .46)
 vs. All of the above 25 88 .26* (.13, .38)
Group and Mixed Counseling
 vs. CBT 1 4 −.62 (−2.21, .96)
 vs. Family 7 24 −.32* (−.47, −.18)
 vs. MET 1 8 −.45 (−1.26, .36)
 vs. MET/CBT 5 5 .20 (−.14, .55)
 vs. PET 3 4 −.16 (−.36, .04)
 vs. No treatment 1 25 −.40 (−1.38, .58)
 vs. All of the above 18 70 −.10 (−.28, .07)
 vs. All treatments (excluding no treatment) 17 45 −.10 (−.28, .08)
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT)
 vs. Behavioral 1 1 .67 (−.02, 1.35)
 vs. Family 3 12 −.53 (−1.36, .30)
 vs. Group and mixed counseling 1 4 .62 (−.96, 2.21)
 vs. MET/CBT 2 6 −.59 (−3.07, 1.88)
 vs. PET 3 7 .16 (−.74, 1.05)
 vs. Practice as usual 2 10 .51 (−2.25, 3.27)
 vs. No treatment 2 3 .49 (−3.62, 4.59)
 vs. All of the above 14 43 −.02 (−.35, .31)
 vs. All treatments (excluding no treatment) 12 40 −.07 (−.43, .28)
Motivational Enhancement Therapy (MET)
 vs. Group and mixed counseling 1 8 .45 (−.36, 1.26)
 vs. PET 5 20 .01 (−.33, .36)
 vs. Skills 1 2 .22 (−2.45, 2.89)
 vs. Practice as usual 1 5 .18 (−.69, 1.05)
 vs. No treatment 9 35 .23* (.13, .32)
 vs. All of the above 17 70 .17* (.07, .27)
 vs. All treatments (excluding no treatment) 8 35 .11 (−.11, .32)
MET/CBT
 vs. Behavioral 1 2 −.36 (−2.16, 1.45)
 vs. CBT 2 6 .59 (−1.88, 3.07)
 vs. Family 5 10 −.11 (−.55, .32)
 vs. Group and mixed counseling 5 5 −.20 (−.55, .14)
 vs. PET 1 2 .33 (−2.96, 3.62)
 vs. All of the above 14 25 −.07 (−.29, .14)
Psychoeducational Therapy (PET)
 vs. CBT 3 7 −.16 (−1.05, .74)
 vs. Family 5 14 −.45* (−.88, −.02)
 vs. Group and mixed counseling 3 4 .16 (−.04, .36)
 vs. MET 5 20 −.01 (−.36, .33)
 vs. MET/CBT 1 2 −.33 (−3.62, 2.96)
 vs. No treatment 2 8 .00 (−1.25, 1.24)
 vs. All of the above 19 55 −.15 (−.32, .01)
 vs. All treatments (excluding no treatment) 17 47 −.16 (−.34, .01)
Pharmacological Treatment
 vs. Placebo 7 13 .30 (−.19, .79)
Skills Training
 vs. MET 1 2 −.22 (−2.89, 2.45)
Practice as Usual
 vs. Behavioral 1 6 .01 (−.43, .45)
 vs. CBT 2 10 −.51 (−3.27, 2.25)
 vs. Family 4 26 −.09 (−.46, .27)
 vs. MET 1 5 −.18 (−1.05, .69)
 vs. All of the abovea 7 43 −.13 (−.35, .09)
No Treatment
 vs. CBT 2 3 −.49 (−4.59, 3.62)
 vs. Group and mixed counseling 1 25 .40 (−.58, 1.38)
 vs. MET 9 35 −.23* (−.32, −.13)
 vs. PET 2 8 .00 (−1.24, 1.25)
 vs. All of the above 14 71 −.20* (−.31, −.10)

Notes: k = number of treatment-comparison group pairs; n = number of effect sizes. All estimates adjusted for baseline group equivalence and pretest differences, pretest-posttest time interval, attrition rate, substance use outcome type (alcohol, marijuana, other drugs), baseline substance use severity, gender mix, race/ethnicity mix, and mean age of the participant sample.

a

Totals do not sum to 43 and 7 because one treatment comparison group pair contributed 4 effect sizes that compared a combined CBT and family therapy program with practice as usual. That k = 1, n = 4 case is only represented once in the “all of the above” category.

*

p< .05