Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2004;1(5):428-39.
doi: 10.1191/1740774504cn041oa.

Statistical issues in multisite effectiveness trials: the case of brief strategic family therapy for adolescent drug abuse treatment

Daniel J Feaster  1 , Michael S Robbins, Viviana Horigian, José Szapocznik
Affiliations

Statistical issues in multisite effectiveness trials: the case of brief strategic family therapy for adolescent drug abuse treatment

Daniel J Feaster et al. Clin Trials. 2004.

Abstract

The statistical development of the multisite Brief Strategic Family Therapy (BSFT) Trial of the National Institute on Drug Abuse's Clinical Trials Network provides a useful, real example of how an effectiveness trial can differ from an efficacy trial. In particular, two design elements distinguish this effectiveness trial from an efficacy trial. First, because the goal of the trial is to show that the use of BSFT would be an improvement on current practice, it was decided to compare BSFT to treatment as usual at each location. This decision ensures that the trial has the most ecological validity to the participating community treatment providers. Second, the desire to generalize the results to general clinical practice dictates that variability (in effect) across community treatment providers be estimated using a random effects model. These two decisions jointly influence the sample size calculations. Allowing variation in treatment as usual, will increase the variability in effect sizes across sites and estimation of this variability as a random effect necessitates a larger sample size (both number of community treatment providers and participants per community treatment provider), than is the case for a fixed site effect estimate. Details of these effects and their implications for the statistical design are presented.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Drug use over follow-up.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Power for main hypothesis.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Johnston LD, O’Malley PM, Bachman JG. National Institutes of Health. Monitoring the future: national results on adolescent drug use. Overview of key findings 2002 (NIDA: NIH Publication No. 03-5374). Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Drug Abuse, 2003.
    1. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA).Mid-year 2000 preliminary emergency department data from the drug abuse warning network. (DHHS Publication No. 01-3502). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2001.
    1. Kazdin AE. Psychotherapy for children and adolescents. In Bergin AE, Garfield SL eds. Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change. New York: Wiley & Sons, 1994: 543–94.
    1. Liddle HA, Dakof GA. Family based treatment for adolescent drug use: state of the science. In Rahdert E et al. eds. Adolescent drug abuse: clinical assessment and therapeutic interventions [NIDA Research Monograph #156, NIH Publication 95-3908]. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1995. - PubMed
    1. Stanton MD, Shadish WR. Outcome, attrition, and family-couples treatment for drug abuse: a meta-analysis and review of the controlled, comparative studies. Psychol Bull. 1997;122:170–91. - PubMed

Publication types