Dataset Information

Measuring affiliation in group therapy for substance use disorders in the Women's Recovery Group study: Does it matter whether the group is all-women or mixed-gender?

ABSTRACT: A Stage II, two-site randomized clinical trial compared the manualized, single-gender Women's Recovery Group (WRG) to mixed-gender group therapy (Group Drug Counseling; GDC) and demonstrated efficacy. Enhanced affiliation and support in the WRG is a hypothesized mechanism of efficacy. This study sought to extend results of the previous small Stage I trial that showed the rate of supportive affiliative statements occurred more frequently in WRG than GDC.Participants (N?=?158; 100 women, 58 men) were 18 years or older, substance dependent, and had used substances within the past 60 days. Women were randomized to WRG (n?=?52) or GDC (n?=?48). Group therapy videos were coded by two independent raters; Rater 1 coded 20% of videos (n?=?74); Rater 2 coded 25% of videos coded by Rater 1 (n?=?19).The number of affiliative statements made in WRG was 66% higher than in GDC. Three of eight affiliative statement categories occurred more frequently in WRG than GDC: supportive, shared experience, and strategy statements.This larger Stage II trial provided a greater number of group therapy tapes available for analysis. Results extended our previous findings, demonstrating both greater frequency of all affiliative statements, as well as specific categories of statements, made in single-gender WRG than mixed-gender GDC.Greater frequency of affiliative statements among group members may be one mechanism of enhanced support and efficacy in women-only WRG compared with standard mixed-gender group therapy for substance use disorders. (Am J Addict 2016;25:573-580).

SUBMITTER: Sugarman DE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5059107 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Measuring affiliation in group therapy for substance use disorders in the Women's Recovery Group study: Does it matter whether the group is all-women or mixed-gender?

Sugarman Dawn E DE Wigderson Sara B SB Iles Brittany R BR Kaufman Julia S JS Fitzmaurice Garrett M GM Hilario E Yvette EY Robbins Michael S MS Greenfield Shelly F SF

The American journal on addictions 20160920 7

<h4>Background and objectives</h4>A Stage II, two-site randomized clinical trial compared the manualized, single-gender Women's Recovery Group (WRG) to mixed-gender group therapy (Group Drug Counseling; GDC) and demonstrated efficacy. Enhanced affiliation and support in the WRG is a hypothesized mechanism of efficacy. This study sought to extend results of the previous small Stage I trial that showed the rate of supportive affiliative statements occurred more frequently in WRG than GDC.<h4>Metho ...[more]

PMID: 27647710

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundEffective measurement of Gender Equality and Women's Empowerment (GEWE) is challenging in low and middle-income countries (LMICs), and even more so in humanitarian settings. Conflict, natural disasters, and epidemics may increase gender inequities, but also present an opportunity to address them. This scoping review describes and identifies gaps in the measurement tools, methods, and indicators used to measure GEWE in humanitarian settings, and presents a dashboard that can be used by researchers, organizations and governments to identify GEWE measurement tools.MethodsScientific articles published between January 2004 and November 2019 were identified using Embase, Medline, PsycInfo, CINAHL, Scopus, and PAIS index. Relevant non peer-reviewed literature was downloaded from the websites of humanitarian organizations. Publications on women and/or girls impacted by a humanitarian crisis in a LMIC, within 5 years of data collection, were included. Publications were double-screened in the title/abstract and full-text stages. We used a machine learning software during the title/abstract screening to increase the efficiency of the process. Measurement tools, sampling and data collection methods, gap areas (geographical, topical and contextual), and indicators were catalogued for easy access in an interactive Tableau dashboard.ResultsOur search yielded 27,197 publications and 2396 non peer-reviewed literature reports. One hundred and seventy publications were included in the final review. Extracted indicators were categorized into seven domains: economic, health, human development, leadership, psychological, security and justice, and sociocultural. The vast majority of studies were observational, and over 70% utilized a cross-sectional study design. Thirty-eight toolkits and questionnaires were identified in this review, of which 19 (50%) were designed specifically for humanitarian settings. Sociocultural was the largest domain in number of studies and indicators in this review, with gender-based violence indicators reported in 66% of studies. Indicators of economic, human development and leadership were uncommon in the peer-reviewed literature.DiscussionWhile there has been some effort to measure GEWE in conflict-affected and other humanitarian settings, measurement has largely focused on violence and security issues. A more comprehensive framework for measuring GEWE in these settings is needed; objective measurement of women's empowerment and gender equality should be prioritized by organizations providing humanitarian aid.

Dataset Information

Measuring affiliation in group therapy for substance use disorders in the Women's Recovery Group study: Does it matter whether the group is all-women or mixed-gender?

Publications

Measuring affiliation in group therapy for substance use disorders in the Women's Recovery Group study: Does it matter whether the group is all-women or mixed-gender?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets