Alcoholics Anonymous (AA)/Twelve‐Step Facilitation (TSF) (manualized) vs other clinical interventions: Abstinence
Alcoholics Anonymous (AA)/Twelve‐Step Facilitation (TSF) (manualized) leads to higher abstinence compared with other clinical interventions (high certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Alcoholics Anonymous (AA)/Twelve‐Step Facilitation (TSF) (manualized) vs other clinical interventions Abstinence · adults (> 18 years) with alcohol use disorder, alcohol abuse, or alcohol dependence Alcoholics Anonymous (AA)/Twelve‐Step Facilitation (TSF) (manualized) leads to higher abstinence compared with other clinical interventions (high certainty). Alcoholics Anonymous and other 12‐step programs for alcohol use disorder (2020) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 1.21 [1.03, 1.42] | 2 studies · 1936 participants | High |
Alcoholics Anonymous (AA)/Twelve‐Step Facilitation (TSF) (manualized) vs other clinical interventions Abstinence · adults (> 18 years) with alcohol use disorder, alcohol abuse, or alcohol dependence It is very uncertain whether alcoholics Anonymous (AA)/Twelve‐Step Facilitation (TSF) (manualized) changes abstinence compared with other clinical interventions (very low certainty). Alcoholics Anonymous and other 12‐step programs for alcohol use disorder (2020) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 1.25 [1.09, 1.43] | 2692 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alcoholics Anonymous and other 12‐step programs for alcohol use disorder 2020 · 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.