***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: AIMS Acamprosate in combination with psychosocial treatment has been shown to be effective for the treatment of alcohol dependence . The goal of the present study was to determine whether the addition of psychosocial intervention to the medical prescription of acamprosate contributes to treatment outcome . METHODS Patients ( n = 248 ) meeting DSM-IV criteria for alcohol dependence or abuse were recruited in 14 outpatient treatment centres and r and omized into one of three treatment conditions : acamprosate ; acamprosate plus minimal intervention aim ed at motivational enhancement ( 3-weekly sessions of 20 min ) ; and acamprosate plus brief cognitive behavioural therapy ( 7-weekly sessions of 60 min ) . Acamprosate was prescribed for 28 weeks , medically monitored by a physician on six occasions lasting 10 min . Drinking behaviour , medication compliance and psychological distress were assessed throughout the treatment period . Follow-up assessment was undertaken 6 months after termination of pharmacological treatment . RESULTS Of 241 patients with intention to treat ( ITT ) , 114 ( 47.3 % ) remained in treatment for the full 28 weeks ; 169 of the ITT population ( 70.1 % ) were seen for follow-up . No statistically significant differences were found between treatment groups for any of the drinking outcomes either at the end of the 28 weeks of treatment or at 6-month follow-up . There were no statistically significant differences in medication compliance , drop-out rates , or psychological distress . However , a significant interaction effect was observed between treatment centre and treatment group , indicating that brief interventions were differentially effective in different treatment centres . CONCLUSIONS A clear supplemental value of minimal and brief psychosocial interventions to the prescription of acamprosate was not demonstrated . The widely held belief that pharmacotherapy for alcohol dependence should always be combined with psychosocial intervention is debatable and merits further research Recent empirical evidence supports the importance of adequate r and omization in controlled trials . Trials with inadequate allocation concealment have been associated with larger treatment effects compared with trials in which authors reported adequate allocation concealment . While that provides empirical evidence of bias being interjected into trials , trial investigators rarely document the sensitive details of subverting the intended purpose of r and omization . This article relates anonymous accounts run the gamut from simple to intricate operations , from transillumination of envelopes to search ing for code in the office files of the principal investigator . They indicate that deciphering is something more frequent than a rate occurrence . These accounts prompt some method ological recommendations to help prevent deciphering . R and omized controlled trials appear to annoy human nature -- if properly conducted , indeed they should AIMS To assess the effectiveness of pharmacotherapy with acamprosate in alcohol-dependent patients treated in a naturalistic setting in primary care in France . METHODS The ARES ( Acamprosate et Repercussions Economiques et Sociales ; Acamprosate and Economic and Social Repercussions ) study was performed by 149 general practitioners interested in treating alcohol use disorders in France who included patients fulfilling DSM-IV criteria for alcohol dependence . The only exclusion criteria concerned contra-indications to acamprosate , co-medication with naltrexone and multiple substance abuse . Eligible patients were r and omized to one of two treatment arms , either st and ard care alone or st and ard care with acamprosate , using an open-label design and followed up quarterly for a period of 1 year . The primary outcome variable was the change from baseline on the Alcohol-Related Problems Question naire . Secondary efficacy variables were abstinence , Clinical Global Impression , quality of life measured with the SF-36 and incidence of adverse events . An intent-to-treat population was used for outcome analysis . RESULTS 422 patients were included , of whom 348 ( 82 % ) completed the protocol as planned . At the end of the study , patients r and omized to the acamprosate group had significantly better outcomes in terms of total ARPQ score , change from baseline ( -2.61 vs -3.44 ) and number of subjects with no alcohol-related problem . On average , patients treated with acamprosate had one less alcohol-related problem than did the controls . The number needed to treat in order to save one additional patient from alcohol-related problems compared to st and ard care was 7.14 . Statistically significant differences in favour of the acamprosate group were observed for all secondary efficacy outcome measures including quality of life . CONCLUSIONS Adjunctive therapy with acamprosate in primary care is associated with significantly better functional outcome . Pragmatic trials in alcohol dependence are both feasible and informative AIMS A multi-centre , r and omized , double-blind , placebo-controlled trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and the safety of acamprosate over 8 weeks in Korean alcohol-dependent patients . METHODS One hundred and forty-two alcohol-dependent patients in 12 centres were r and omized to 8 weeks treatment with either acamprosate ( n = 72 ) or a placebo ( n = 70 ) in combination with out-patient psychosocial intervention .  They were predominantly male ( 95.8 % ) , with a mean age of 44.3 + /- 8.3 years ; 76.1 % were married ; 59.9 % were employed ; 58.5 % had received previous alcoholism treatment ( previous mean number of admissions in alcoholism in-patient programmes 4.6 + /- 6.9 ) . At visits to the clinic ( weekly for 4 weeks , then biweekly for 4 weeks ) , a record was made of alcohol use ( Time-Line Follow-Back ) , alcohol craving using a Korean version of the Obsessive Compulsive Drinking Scale and a visual analogue scale , and adverse events . Serum aspartate aminotransferase , alanine aminotransferase , gamma-glutamyltransferase ( GGT ) , blood urea nitrogen and creatinine levels were measured on weeks 0 , 2 , 4 and 8 . RESULTS In the acamprosate group ( A ) , 71.4 % had had alcohol within the 2 days prior to starting medication , against 65.2 % of patients in the placebo group ( P ) ; ( P > 0.05 ) . One hundred and one subjects ( 71.1 % ) completed 8-weeks of treatment ( A , 73.6 % ; P , 68.6 % ; P > 0.05 ) . During the 8-week treatment period , 37 , ( A ) ( n = 72 ) and 32 % ( P ) ( n = 70 ) achieved continuous abstinence ( P > 0.05 ) , and 40 , ( A ) and 39 % ( P ) remained without relapse ( P > 0.05 ) ( defined as a day when a man consumed five or more drinks or a woman four or more drinks ) . The percentage of days abstinent during the 8-week treatment period was 81.2 , ( A ) and 78.5 % ( P ) ( P > 0.05 ) , and the percentage of days without heavy drinking 86.1 ( A ) and 84.9 % ( P ) ( P > 0.05 ) . The mean amount drunk per drinking occasion was 7.2 , ( A ) and 8.6 st and ard drinks ( P ) ( P > 0.05 ) . No statistically significant differences in changes in the serum GGT level or craving scores from baseline to the end-point of treatment were found between the two groups . Recency of drinking prior to commencing study drug predicted percentage of days abstinent in the first 2 weeks on treatment ; however , when ANOVAs were conducted using treatment outcomes as a dependent variable , medication condition as an independent variable and the period of abstinence prior to treatment as a covariate , a significant effect of medication condition was still not seen . CONCLUSIONS Acamprosate was ineffective in reducing drinking  in this Korean sample . The result differs from that of most European acamprosate trials . This might be explained by our sample 's relatively severe alcohol dependence , and low social support , or the fact that many patients were still drinking near to their first medication . The variability of the psychosocial support , ethnicity ( which might also affect acamprosate pharmacokinetics ) and the Korean drinking style , which differs from that of Europeans , might have contributed to our negative result CONTEXT The Consoli date d St and ards for Reporting of Trials ( CONSORT ) statement was developed to help improve the quality of reports of r and omized controlled trials ( RCTs ) . To date , a paucity of data exists regarding whether it has achieved this goal . OBJECTIVE To determine whether use of the CONSORT statement is associated with improvement in the quality of reports of RCTs . DESIGN AND SETTING Comparative before- and -after evaluation in which reports of RCTs published in 1994 ( pre-CONSORT ) were compared with RCT reports from the same journals published in 1998 ( post-CONSORT ) . We included 211 reports from BMJ , JAMA , and The Lancet ( journals that adopted CONSORT ) as well as The New Engl and Journal of Medicine ( a journal that did not adopt CONSORT and was used as a comparator ) . MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Number of CONSORT items included in a report , frequency of unclear reporting of allocation concealment , and overall trial quality score based on the Jadad scale , a 5-point quality assessment instrument . RESULTS Compared with 1994 , the number of CONSORT checklist items in reports of RCTs increased in all 4 journals in 1998 , and this increase was statistically significant for the 3 adopter journals ( pre-CONSORT , 23.4 ; mean change , 3.7 ; 95 % confidence interval [ CI ] , 2.1 - 5.3 ) . The frequency of unclear reporting of allocation concealment decreased for each of the 4 journals , and this change was statistically significant for adopters ( pre-CONSORT , 61 % ; mean change , -22 % ; 95 % CI , -38 % to -6 % ) . Similarly , 3 of the 4 journals showed an improvement in the quality score for reports of RCTs , and this increase was statistically significant for adopter journals overall ( pre-CONSORT , 2.7 ; mean change , 0.4 ; 95 % CI , 0.1 - 0.8 ) . CONCLUSION Use of the CONSORT statement is associated with improvements in the quality of reports of RCTs Background The heterogeneity statistic I2 , interpreted as the percentage of variability due to heterogeneity between studies rather than sampling error , depends on precision , that is , the size of the studies included . Methods Based on a real meta- analysis , we simulate artificially ' inflating ' the sample size under the r and om effects model . For a given inflation factor M = 1 , 2 , 3 , ... and for each trial i , we create a M-inflated trial by drawing a treatment effect estimate from the r and om effects model , using si2MathType@MTEF@5@5@+=feaagaart1ev2aaatCvAUfKttLearuWrP9MDH5MBPbIqV92AaeXatLxBI9gBaebbnrfifHhDYfgasaacPC6xNi = xH8viVGI8Gi = hEeeu0xXdbba9frFj0xb9qqpG0dXdb9aspeI8k8fiI+fsY = rqGqVepae9pg0db9vqaiVgFr0xfr = xfr = xc9adbaqaaeGaciGaaiaabeqaaeqabiWaaaGcbaGaem4Cam3aa0baaSqaaiabdMgaPbqaaiabikdaYaaaaaa@2FBE@/M as within-trial sampling variance . Results As precision increases , while estimates of the heterogeneity variance τ2 remain unchanged on average , estimates of I2 increase rapidly to nearly 100 % . A similar phenomenon is apparent in a sample of 157 meta-analyses . Conclusion When deciding whether or not to pool treatment estimates in a meta- analysis , the yard-stick should be the clinical relevance of any heterogeneity present . τ2 , rather than I2 , is the appropriate measure for this purpose BACKGROUND Naltrexone and acamprosate have been shown to be effective in relapse prevention of alcoholism via different pharmacologic mechanisms . Since it remains uncertain whether both substances are equally efficient and whether a combination of both drugs potentiates the efficacy , we conducted the first published controlled study comparing and combining both compounds . METHODS After detoxification , 160 patients with alcoholism participated in a r and omized , double-blind , placebo-controlled protocol . Patients received naltrexone , acamprosate , naltrexone plus acamprosate , or placebo for 12 weeks . Patients were assessed weekly by interview , self-report , question naires , and laboratory screening .  Time to first drink , time to relapse , and the cumulative abstinence time were the primary outcome measures . RESULTS Naltrexone , acamprosate , and the combined medication were significantly more effective than placebo . Comparing the course of nonrelapse rates between naltrexone and acamprosate , the naltrexone group showed a tendency for a better outcome regarding time to first drink and time to relapse . The combined medication was most effective with significantly lower relapse rates than placebo and acamprosate but not naltrexone . CONCLUSIONS The results of this study support the efficacy of pharmacotherapeutic strategies in the relapse prevention of alcoholism . Naltrexone and acamprosate , especially in combination , considerably enhance the potential of relapse prevention AIMS To compare two levels of psychosocial intervention in combination with acamprosate medication for the treatment of alcohol dependence . METHODS Pat 
    Output:
    
Acamprosate appears to be an effective and safe treatment strategy for supporting continuous abstinence after detoxification in alcohol dependent patients .