Cognitive‐behavioural coping skills training (CBCST) vs Twelve Step Facilitation: Number of participants achieving 3 or more weeks of consecutive alcohol abstinence during treatment
It is very uncertain whether cognitive‐behavioural coping skills training (CBCST) changes number of participants achieving 3 or more weeks of consecutive… compared with twelve‐step facilitation (TSF) programme to reduce alcohol consumption (very low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Cognitive‐behavioural coping skills training (CBCST) vs twelve‐step facilitation (TSF) programme to reduce alcohol consumption Number of participants achieving 3 or more weeks of consecutive alcohol abstinence during treatment · concurrent problem alcohol and illicit drug users It is very uncertain whether cognitive‐behavioural coping skills training (CBCST) changes number of participants achieving 3 or more weeks of consecutive… compared with twelve‐step facilitation (TSF) programme to reduce alcohol consumption (very low certainty). Psychosocial interventions to reduce alcohol consumption in concurrent problem alcohol and illicit drug users (2018) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 1.96 [0.43, 8.94] | 1 study · 41 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Psychosocial interventions to reduce alcohol consumption in concurrent problem alcohol and illicit drug users 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.