13. Comparison 3. Contingency management (CM) + standard maintenance (SM) versus SM: Addiction Severity Index scores.
| Study | Outcome | Experimental group: CM + SM | Control group: SM | Difference of least square means over months 1 to 6 | df | P value | Comments | ||
| Adjusted mean | SE | Adjusted mean | SE | ||||||
| Neufeld 2008 | Family/social domain scores | 0.08 | 0.02 | 0.16 | 0.02 | −0.09 | 81 | 0.005 | Favours experimental group: CM + SM |
| Neufeld 2008 | Employment domain scores | 0.72 | 0.04 | 0.72 | 0.04 | 0.006 | 81 | 0.91 | Favours neither group |
| Neufeld 2008 | Alcohol domain scores | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.04 | 0.01 | −0.02 | 81 | 0.17 | Favours neither group |
| Neufeld 2008 | Drug domain scores | 0.16 | 0.01 | 0.19 | 0.01 | −0.03 | 81 | 0.09 | Favours neither group |
| CM: contingency management; df: degrees of freedom SE: standard error; SM: standard maintenance. | |||||||||
Summary data supplied by the trial investigators. Adjusted means obtained from mixed regression model, which included time‐specific random effects and an interaction term.