This article reviews the outcome (usually abstinence at 12 months) of 21 controlled studies of AA, with emphasis on methodological quality. Severe selection biases compromised all quasi-experiments. Randomized studies yielded worse results for AA than nonrandomized studies, but were biased by selection of coerced subjects. Attending conventional AA meetings was worse than no treatment or alternative treatment; residential AA-modeled treatments performed no better or worse than alternatives; and several components of AA seemed supported (recovering alcoholics as therapists, peer-led self-help therapy groups, teaching the Twelve-Step process, and doing an honest inventory).
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/10826089909039431 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!