4.2 Review

Digital Interventions for Problematic Cannabis Users in Non-Clinical Settings: Findings from a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Journal

EUROPEAN ADDICTION RESEARCH
Volume 22, Issue 5, Pages 233-242

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000445716

Keywords

Meta-analysis; Systematic review; Cannabis; Marijuana Internet; Computer; Intervention; Information and communication technology; ICT

Funding

  1. European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Existing cannabis treatment programs reach only a very limited proportion of people with cannabis-related problems. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the effectiveness of digital interventions applied outside the health care system in reducing problematic cannabis use. Methods: We systematically searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (2015), PubMed (2009-2015), Medline (2009-2015), Google Scholar (2015) and article reference lists for potentially eligible studies. Randomized controlled trials examining the effects of internet-or computer-based interventions were assessed. Study effects were estimated by calculating effect sizes (ESs) using Cohen's d and Hedges' g bias-corrected ES. The primary outcome assessed was self-reported cannabis use, measured by a questionnaire. Results: Fifty-two studies were identified. Four studies (including 1,928 participants) met inclusion criteria. They combined brief motivational interventions and cognitive behavioral therapy delivered on-line. All studies were of good quality. The pooled mean difference (Delta = 4.07) and overall ES (0.11) give evidence of small effects at 3-month follow-up in favor of digital interventions. Conclusions: Digital interventions can help to successfully reduce problematic cannabis use outside clinical settings. They have some potential to overcome treatment barriers and increase accessibility for at-risk cannabis users. (C) 2016 S. Karger AG, Basel

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available