|
1
|
Controlled assignment to treatment conditions (random assignment, matching of total groups or controlled design, without randomization (2.5) matching in pairs)
|
5
|
|
2
|
Pre-post-measurement of change
|
5
|
|
3
|
Sample size N = 50-100 (0.5) N = 100-150 (1) N > 150 (1.5)
|
1.5
|
|
4
|
No contamination of major independent variables: Most important independent variable is valid, i.e., parental substance use proven (2), very likely (1), program implemented by professional staff (3)
|
5
|
|
5
|
Appropriate statistical analyses
|
1
|
|
6
|
Data collected via self-assessment and expert interviews
|
1
|
|
7
|
Follow-up in months 1–3 (0.5), 4–6 (1), 7–12 (1.5) 13–18 (2), 19–24 (2.5) >24 (3)
|
3
|
|
8
|
Evidence of treatment adherence: probably (0.5), certainly, as stated by the authors (1), verifiable (1.5)
|
1.5
|
|
9
|
Multiple change indices
|
1
|
|
10
|
Multiple vantage points for assessing outcome, multiple criterion measurement
|
1
|
|
11
|
Quality of instruments reported
|
1
|
|
12
|
Simultaneous data collection for the control group; Non-simultaneous data collection for the control group (0.5)
|
1
|
|
13
|
Outcome assessment: Non-responder – improvement (0.5)Deterioration – improvement (1)
|
1
|
|
14
|
Therapist-investigator nonequivalence: examiners not involved in program delivery
|
1
|
|
15
|
Treatment dropouts / intent-to-treat analyses
|
1
|
