The Effectiveness of Cognitive Bias Modification Interventions for Substance Addictions: A Meta-Analysis

Background and Aims Cognitive bias modification (CBM) interventions, presumably targeting automatic processes, are considered particularly promising for addictions. We conducted a meta-analysis examining randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of CBM for substance addiction outcomes. Methods Studies were identified through systematic searches in bibliographical databases. We included RCTs of CBM interventions, alone or in combination with other treatments, for any type of addiction. We examined trial risk of bias, publication bias and possible moderators. Effects sizes were computed for post-test and follow-up, using a random-effects model. We grouped outcome measures and reported results for addiction (all related measures), craving and cognitive bias. Results We identified 25 trials, 18 for alcohol problems, and 7 for smoking. At post-test, there was no significant effect of CBM for addiction, g = 0.08 (95% CI -0.02 to 0.18) or craving, g = 0.05 (95% CI -0.06 to 0.16), but there was a significant, moderate effect on cognitive bias, g = 0.60 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.79). Results were similar for alcohol and smoking outcomes taken separately. Follow-up addiction outcomes were reported in 7 trials, resulting in a small but significant effect of CBM, g = 0.18 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.32). Results for addiction and craving did not differ by substance type, sample type, delivery setting, bias targeted or number of sessions. Risk of bias was high or uncertain in most trials, for most criteria considered. Meta-regression analyses revealed significant inverse relationships between risk of bias and effect sizes for addiction outcomes and craving. The relationship between cognitive bias and respectively addiction ESs was not significant. There was consistent evidence of publication bias in the form of funnel plot asymmetry. Conclusions Our results cast serious doubts on the clinical utility of CBM interventions for addiction problems, but sounder methodological trials are necessary before this issue can be settled. We found no indication that positive effects on biases translate into effects on addiction outcomes.

[1]  P. Cuijpers,et al.  Practitioner Review: Cognitive bias modification for mental health problems in children and adolescents: a meta-analysis. , 2015, Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines.

[2]  Jacob Cohen.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[3]  S Duval,et al.  Trim and Fill: A Simple Funnel‐Plot–Based Method of Testing and Adjusting for Publication Bias in Meta‐Analysis , 2000, Biometrics.

[4]  C. Bias.  The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials , 2011 .

[5]  Xiao-Hua Zhou,et al.  Statistical Methods for Meta‐Analysis , 2008 .

[6]  E. Holmes,et al.  Cognitive bias modification: an intervention approach worth attending to. , 2012, The American journal of psychiatry.

[7]  D. Moher,et al.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. , 2010, International journal of surgery.

[8]  D. Moher,et al.  Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement , 2009, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[9]  P. Cuijpers,et al.  Efficacy of cognitive bias modification interventions in anxiety and depression: meta-analysis. , 2015, The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science.

[10]  M. Field,et al.  Less than meets the eye: reappraising the clinical relevance of attentional bias in addiction. , 2015, Addictive behaviors.

[11]  D L Sackett,et al.  An assessment of clinically useful measures of the consequences of treatment. , 1988, The New England journal of medicine.

[12]  Colin MacLeod,et al.  Absence of evidence or evidence of absence: reflecting on therapeutic implementations of attentional bias modification , 2014, BMC Psychiatry.

[13]  J. Intriligator,et al.  Attentional bias modification for addictive behaviors: clinical implications , 2014, CNS Spectrums.

[14]  M. Luijten,et al.  The Clinical Relevance of Neurocognitive Measures in Addiction , 2014, Front. Psychiatry.

[15]  M. S. Patel,et al.  An introduction to meta-analysis. , 1989, Health Policy.

[16]  Nikolaos A Patsopoulos,et al.  Uncertainty in heterogeneity estimates in meta-analyses , 2007, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[17]  Colin Macleod,et al.  Cognitive bias modification procedures in the management of mental disorders , 2012, Current opinion in psychiatry.

[18]  Mijke Rhemtulla,et al.  Alcohol cognitive bias modification training for problem drinkers over the web. , 2015, Addictive behaviors.

[19]  E. Koster,et al.  Clinical efficacy of attentional bias modification procedures: an updated meta-analysis. , 2014, Journal of clinical psychology.

[20]  C. Beard,et al.  Cognitive bias modification for anxiety: current evidence and future directions , 2011, Expert review of neurotherapeutics.

[21]  J. Sterne,et al.  The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials , 2011, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[22]  P. Lachenbruch.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.) , 1989 .

[23]  D. Altman,et al.  Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses , 2003, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[24]  David J. Kupfer,et al.  Size of Treatment Effects and Their Importance to Clinical Research and Practice , 2006, Biological Psychiatry.

[25]  Julian P. T. Higgins,et al.  HETEROGI: Stata module to quantify heterogeneity in a meta-analysis , 2005 .

[26]  C. Boettiger,et al.  “Killing Two Birds with One Stone”: Alcohol Use Reduction Interventions with Potential Efficacy at Enhancing Self-control , 2014, Current Addiction Reports.

[27]  Reinout W. Wiers,et al.  Cognitive Bias Modification and Cognitive Control Training in Addiction and Related Psychopathology , 2013 .

[28]  Andrew Mathews,et al.  Cognitive bias modification approaches to anxiety. , 2012, Annual review of clinical psychology.