↓ Skip to main content

Drug and alcohol treatment providers’ views about the disease model of addiction and its impact on clinical practice: A systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Drug & Alcohol Review, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
21 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Drug and alcohol treatment providers’ views about the disease model of addiction and its impact on clinical practice: A systematic review
Published in
Drug & Alcohol Review, December 2017
DOI 10.1111/dar.12632
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anthony I. Barnett, Wayne Hall, Craig L. Fry, Ella Dilkes-Frayne, Adrian Carter

Abstract

Addiction treatment providers' views about the disease model of addiction (DMA), and their contemporary views about the brain disease model of addiction (BDMA), remain an understudied area. We systematically reviewed treatment providers' attitudes about the DMA/BDMA, examined factors associated with positive or negative attitudes and assessed their views on the potential clinical impact of both models. Pubmed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL Plus and Sociological Abstracts were systematically searched. Original papers on treatment providers' views about the DMA/BDMA and its clinical impact were included. Studies focussing on tobacco, behavioural addictions or non-Western populations were excluded. The 34 included studies were predominantly quantitative and conducted in the USA. Among mixed findings of treatment providers' support for the DMA, strong validity studies indicated treatment providers supported the disease concept and moral, free-will or social models simultaneously. Support for the DMA was positively associated with treatment providers' age, year of qualification, certification status, religious beliefs, being in recovery and Alcoholics Anonymous attendance. Greater education was negatively associated with DMA support. Treatment providers identified potential positive (e.g. reduced stigma) and negative (e.g. increased sense of helplessness) impacts of the DMA on client behaviour. The review suggests treatment providers may endorse disease and other models while strategically deploying the DMA for presumed therapeutic benefits. Varying DMA support across workforces indicated service users may experience multiple and potentially contradictory explanations of addiction. Future policy development will benefit by considering how treatment providers adopt disease concepts in practice.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 30%
Unspecified 5 17%
Other 4 13%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Researcher 2 7%
Other 7 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 9 30%
Unspecified 8 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 13%
Sports and Recreations 2 7%
Other 3 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 14 December 2018.
All research outputs
#939,303
of 12,447,688 outputs
Outputs from Drug & Alcohol Review
#169
of 1,173 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,842
of 372,460 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug & Alcohol Review
#8
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,447,688 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,173 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 372,460 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.