| Title |
Structural Ecosystems Therapy for HIV+ African‐American Women and Drug Abuse Relapse
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Family Process, May 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1545-5300.2010.01318.x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
DANIEL J. FEASTER, MYRON J. BURNS, AHNALEE M. BRINCKS, GUILLERMO PRADO, VICTORIA B. MITRANI, MEGALY H. MAUER, JOSE SZAPOCZNIK |
| Abstract |
This report examines the effect of Structural Ecosystems Therapy (SET) for (n=143) HIV+ African-American women on rate of relapse to substance use relative to both a person-centered approach (PCA) to therapy and a community control (CC) group. A prior report has shown SET to decrease psychological distress and family hassles relative to these 2 comparison groups. In new analyses, SET and CC had a significant protective effect against relapse as compared with PCA. There is evidence that SET's protective effect on relapse was related to reductions in family hassles, whereas there was not a direct impact of change in psychological distress on rates of relapse. Lower retention in PCA, perhaps caused by the lack of a directive component to PCA, may have put these women at greater risk for relapse. Whereas SET did not specifically address substance abuse, SET indirectly protected at-risk women from relapse through reductions in family hassles. |
Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 54 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 23 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 10 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 25 | 46% |