No, that quoted section - you're right I was wrong that it wasn't in the paper - clearly contradicts the rest of the paper. The most important determinant for success was completing 27 weeks either in outpatient-treatment or in AA in the first year. This is made very clear elsewhere in the paper. Continued involvement in AA lead to further long-term improvements, but it wasn't at all "the most important determinant for success".
And that's just going on their data, and their own claims elsewhere in the paper.
The fact is that treatment is effective and doesn't lose its effectiveness the way that AA appears to. Even the program they used in 1990 for 27 weeks produced results that could not be improved upon at that time (i.e., a patient receiving 28 or more weeks of professional treatment saw no further benefit). This is good, this is what we want from treatment, we want it to be finite - if it's 27 weeks or whatever the length, there should be a cut off time that the benefit has been delivered by.
With AA this was not the case. Thus you could argue that AA has more to offer but is unable to offer it within the same time period. And that's compared to 1990's treatment.
Compared to today's CBT outpatient programs it would probably not do anywhere near as well as it did in 1990 against a more primitive form of treatment. Today we have treatment programs that as I said seem to be expected to last between 3 to 6 months, which is a lot faster than 27 weeks to deliver that long-term benefit. You also have to remember treatment is generally once a week, whereas AA can be up to three meetings per week, so although they both delivered the same long-term benefit after 27 weeks, it takes more relative effort for those attending AA than for those attending treatment.
Most importantly of all, as I said before, patients who received both professional treatment and attended AA had the best chance of success. So again, AA does not replace therapy, but it can work in parallel to deliver further benefit and further chance of success. My advice to any alcoholic would be to try both CBT (outpatient care) by a qualified therapist, and AA, and based on the study to attend AA for at least 27 weeks, and to attend the CBT treatment plan for the duration requested by the therapist.
And that's just going on their data, and their own claims elsewhere in the paper.
The fact is that treatment is effective and doesn't lose its effectiveness the way that AA appears to. Even the program they used in 1990 for 27 weeks produced results that could not be improved upon at that time (i.e., a patient receiving 28 or more weeks of professional treatment saw no further benefit). This is good, this is what we want from treatment, we want it to be finite - if it's 27 weeks or whatever the length, there should be a cut off time that the benefit has been delivered by.
With AA this was not the case. Thus you could argue that AA has more to offer but is unable to offer it within the same time period. And that's compared to 1990's treatment.
Compared to today's CBT outpatient programs it would probably not do anywhere near as well as it did in 1990 against a more primitive form of treatment. Today we have treatment programs that as I said seem to be expected to last between 3 to 6 months, which is a lot faster than 27 weeks to deliver that long-term benefit. You also have to remember treatment is generally once a week, whereas AA can be up to three meetings per week, so although they both delivered the same long-term benefit after 27 weeks, it takes more relative effort for those attending AA than for those attending treatment.
Most importantly of all, as I said before, patients who received both professional treatment and attended AA had the best chance of success. So again, AA does not replace therapy, but it can work in parallel to deliver further benefit and further chance of success. My advice to any alcoholic would be to try both CBT (outpatient care) by a qualified therapist, and AA, and based on the study to attend AA for at least 27 weeks, and to attend the CBT treatment plan for the duration requested by the therapist.
For Religion & Health see:[/b][/size] Williams & Sternthal. (2007). Spirituality, religion and health: Evidence and research directions. Med. J. Aust., 186(10), S47-S50. -LINK
The WIN/Gallup End of Year Survey 2013 found the US was perceived to be the greatest threat to world peace by a huge margin, with 24% of respondents fearful of the US followed by: 8% for Pakistan, and 6% for China. This was followed by 5% each for: Afghanistan, Iran, Israel, North Korea. -LINK
"That's disgusting. There were clean athletes out there that have had their whole careers ruined by people like Lance Armstrong who just bended thoughts to fit their circumstances. He didn't look up cheating because he wanted to stop, he wanted to justify what he was doing and to keep that continuing on." - Nicole Cooke
The WIN/Gallup End of Year Survey 2013 found the US was perceived to be the greatest threat to world peace by a huge margin, with 24% of respondents fearful of the US followed by: 8% for Pakistan, and 6% for China. This was followed by 5% each for: Afghanistan, Iran, Israel, North Korea. -LINK
"That's disgusting. There were clean athletes out there that have had their whole careers ruined by people like Lance Armstrong who just bended thoughts to fit their circumstances. He didn't look up cheating because he wanted to stop, he wanted to justify what he was doing and to keep that continuing on." - Nicole Cooke
