Table 2. Effects of CBM interventions, compared to control, at posttest and follow-up, for addiction outcomes^a.

Variable	n	g	95% CI	I2	I2 95% CI	NNT	pb
Addiction (all measures)	24	0.08	-0.02 to 0.18	0	0~40	21.74
One ES per study (only highest)	24	0.11	0.009 to 0.20	0	0~40	16.13
One ES per study (only lowest)	24	0.05	-0.05 to 0.15	0	0~40	35.71
Established outcome measures only	21	0.09	-0.02 to 0.20	0	0~41	20
Comparisons with increase bias interventions excludedc	18	0.04	-0.07 to 0.15	0	0~44	45.45
Studies of CBM combined with another interventiond	4	0.06	-0.16 to 0.28	7	0~70	29.41
Subgroup analysise
Addiction type Alcohol	17	0.10	-0.01 to 0.22	0	0~45	17.86	0.459
Smoking	7	0.02	-0.15 to 0.20	0	0~58	83.33
Sample type Consumers	20	0.08	-0.03 to 0.19	0	0~42	21.74	0.979
Patients	4	0.07	-0.19 to 0.34	30	0~76	25
Delivery settingf Laboratory	15	0.07	-0.06 to 0.21	0	0~46	25	0.999
Home	4	0.07	-0.15 to 0.28	0	0~68	25
Clinic	4	0.07	-0.19 to 0.34	30	0~76	25
Bias targetedg Approach	7	0.07	-0.08 to 0.23	0	0~58	25	0.437
Attentional	12	0.03	-0.12 to 0.18	0	0~50	62.5
Inhibition	4	0.23	-0.04 to 0.50	0	0~68	7.69
Number of sessions Single	11	0.07	-0.07 to 0.21	0	0~51	25	0.867
Multiple	13	0.09	-0.05 to 0.22	0	0~49	20
Craving	18	0.05	-0.06 to 0.16	0	0~44	35.71
One ES per study (only highest)	18	0.08	-0.03 to 0.20	2	0~44	21.74
One ES per study (only lowest)	18	0.02	-0.09 to 0.14	0	0~44	83.33
Established outcome measures only	14	0.05	-0.09 to 0.19	0	0~49	35.71
Comparisons with increase bias interventions excludedh	14	0.02	-0.11 to 0.14	0	0~47	83.33
Studies of CBM combined with another interventiond	4	0.03	-0.32 to 0.38	56	0~83	62.5
Subgroup analysise
Addiction type Alcohol	12	0.07	-0.07 to 0.20	0	0~50	25	0.798
Smoking	6	0.03	-0.22 to 0.28	27	0~71	62.5
Sample type Consumers	14	0.05	-0.08 to 0.19	0	0~47	35.71	0.908
Patients	4	0.03	-0.32 to 0.38	56	0~83	62.5
Delivery setting Laboratory	12	0.06	-0.09 to 0.21	0	0~50	29.41	0.972
Home	2	0.02	-0.35 to 0.39	0	N/Ai	83.33
Clinic	4	0.03	-0.32 to 0.38	56	0~83	62.5
Bias targetedj Approach	6	0.10	-0.07 to 0.28	0	0~61	17.86	0.36
Attentional	10	-0.01	-0.19 to 0.16	11	0~58	166.67
Number of sessions Single	8	0.04	-0.15 to 0.22	0	0~56	45.45	0.895
Multiple	10	0.05	-0.10 to 0.21	10	0~57	35.71
Addiction (all measures)- follow-up	7	0.18	0.03 to 0.32	0	0~58	9.80
One ES per study (only highest)	7	0.18	0.04 to 0.32	0	0~58	9.80
One ES per study (only lowest)	7	0.16	0.02 to 0.31	0	0~58	11.11
Established outcome measures only	7	0.18	0.04 to 0.32	0	0~58	9.80
Studies of CBM combined with another interventiond	5	0.19	0.04 to 0.34	0	0~64	9.43
Subgroup analysise
Addiction type Alcohol	5	0.18	0.03 to 0.33	0	0~64	9.80	0.933
Smoking	2	0.16	-0.23 to 0.56	0	N/Ai	11.11
Sample type Consumers	3	0.09	-0.28 to 0.46	0	0~73	20	0.608
Patients	4	0.19	0.04 to 0.34	0	0~68	9.43
Bias targeted Approach	3	0.20	0.04 to 0.36	0	0~73	8.93	0.565
Attentional	4	0.10	-0.20 to 0.40	0	0~68	17.86

Note.

^a All results are reported with Hedges g, using a random effects model

^b The p levels in this column indicate whether the difference between the ESs in the subgroups is significant (significant results are marked with italic)

^c Attwood et al., 2008; Field et al., 2005; Houben et al., 2011; Houben et al., 2012; WiersRW et al., 2010; Woud et al., 2015

^d Begh et al., 2015; Lopes et al., 2014; Schoenmakers et al., 2010; Wiers et al., 2011

^e Subgroup analysis were conducted using a mixed effects model.

^f One study (Boendermarker et al. 2015 Study 1) gave participants a choice between home and laboratory delivery

^g One study (Woud et al., 2015) used a different type of CBM (CBM for interpretation bias)

^h Attwood et al., 2008; Field et al., 2005; WiersRW et al., 2010; Woud et al., 2015

ⁱ Confidence intervals around I² cannot be calculated if there are fewer than 3 groups

^j The subgroups targeting inhibition and respectively interpretation bias only had one study

n = number of trials; NNT = numbers needed to treat; N/A not available. Underlined NNT values indicate negative ES values (the direction of the effect favored the control group)