A multisite field trial testing whether improved outcomes associated with intensive referral to mutual help groups (MHGs) could be maintained after the intervention was adapted for the circumstances and needs of rural veterans in treatment for substance use disorder (SUD).
In three Veterans Affairs treatment programs in the Midwest, patients (N=195) received standard referral (SR) or rural-adapted intensive referral (RAIR) and were measured at baseline and 6-month follow-up.
Both groups reported significant improvement at 6-months, but no significant differences between SR and RAIR groups in MHG participation, substance use, addiction severity, and posttraumatic stress symptoms. Inconsistent delivery of the intervention resulted in only one-third of the RAIR group receiving the full three sessions, but this group reported significantly greater 6-month abstinence from alcohol than those receiving no sessions.
Further research should explore implementation problems and determine whether consistent delivery of the intervention enhances 12-step facilitation.
The addition of rural-specific elements to the original intensive referral intervention has not been shown to increase its effectiveness among rural veterans.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 July 2020.
All research outputs
#4,539,797
of 34,400,738 outputs
Outputs from Patient Education & Counseling
#749
of 4,782 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,819
of 357,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient Education & Counseling
#25
of 89 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,400,738 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,782 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 357,850 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 89 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
