Abstract
This paper offers a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies on the main twelve-step mutual-help (TSMH) groups (excluding Alcoholics Anonymous) and four meta-analyses exploring the correlation between (i) duration or involvement in TSMH groups and; (ii) severity of symptoms or quality of life. Systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Searches of databases (MEDLINE, PsychInfo), a register (ClinicalTrials) and citations were conducted, from inception through November 01 2022. Fifty five articles were included (24 quantitative, 27 qualitative, 4 mixed-methods), corresponding to 47 distinctive studies. 68% of these studies were conducted in North America, 17% in Middle East, 11% in the European Union and 4% in Australia. The most studied TSMH group were Gamblers Anonymous (28% of the 47 studies), Narcotics Anonymous (26%), Double Trouble in Recovery (15%), Overeaters Anonymous (19%) and TSMH groups for compulsive sexual behaviors (11%). The four meta-analyses pooled data from 9 studies. Pooled mean age ranged from 36.5 to 40.5. 80–81% of participants were male. TSMH attendance and involvement were negatively correlated with severity of symptoms (high and medium levels of evidence) and positively correlated with quality of life (low levels of evidence). Twenty-one qualitative papers reported factors influencing recovery: Social (n = 15), emotional (n = 9), spiritual (n = 8), self-identification or psychological (n = 6) factors. Review provides characteristics of TSMH groups others than Alcoholics Anonymous, with implications for both research and healthcare practice. The perspective to implement TSMH groups targeting ontological addiction, at the root of all addiction, is discussed.
Protocol registration: Prospero registration number: CRD42022342605.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Several systematic reviews have demonstrated that social isolation (the lack of social contacts and having few people to interact with regularly) is associated with depressive symptoms [1, 2], which, in turn, are correlated with unhealthy behaviors and reduced access to material resources [3]. Loneliness (the distressing feeling of being alone or separated) can lead to mental illness such as depression, alcohol abuse, sleep problems, Alzheimer’s disease, and to physical disorders like diabetes, autoimmune disorders and cardiovascular diseases, physiological aging, cancer, poor hearing and poor health [4]. This is even more problematic for individuals with addictive disorders, which are at greater risk of being isolated and feeling lonely than healthy individuals. The literature has shown significant positive associations between loneliness and diverse type of addictions, such as alcohol [5], internet [6], Facebook [7], smartphone [8, 9], gambling [10] and food [11,12,13]. Without tackling social isolation and loneliness of individuals with addictive disorders, the vicious circle of addiction, loneliness, mental and physical illness may not end. In the case of drug addicts, Atadokht et al. [14] demonstrated a significant negative correlation between perceived social support and the frequency of relapse (r = − 0.34, P = 0.001).
One solution arises from self-help groups, that is, a supportive, educational, generally change-oriented group that addresses a specific life problem shared by all its member [15]. Involvement in a self-help group has proved efficient in reducing loneliness, social isolation [16, 17] and stress [18], as well as in improving meaning in life [19, 20], hope and health-promoting behaviors [21]. It also facilitates abstinence maintenance and symptoms reduction [22,23,24].
The more widely spread kind of self-help groups are twelve-step mutual help (TSMH) groups. TSMH are available for Alcoholic use disorder (alcoholic Anonymous; AA), substance use disorder (Narcotics Anonymous; NA), pathological gambling (Gamblers Anonymous; GA), eating disorder (Overeaters Anonymous; OA), dual diagnosis (Double Trouble in Recovery; DTR), compulsive sexual behavior disorder (CSBD; e.g. Sexaholics Anonymous; SA) and several other addictive behaviors (see Appendix A for a list of 28 TSMH groups). The 12-steps underlying the recovery culture of AA, NA, GA, OA, SA and DTR are described in Appendix B. Most of TSMH groups are born in the USA, and nowadays North America represents 75%, 68% and 57% of global face-to-face meetings in NA, OA and GA, respectively (see Appendix C for the breakdown of face-to-face NA, OA and GA meetings by geographical area).
Among all TSMH groups, AA is the first in history, the most widely spread worldwide, and the most studied by the literature (see Appendix D for detailed information on AA, NA, OA, GA, SA and DTR). Evidences attesting the efficacy and cost-efficiency of AA are robust. A meta-analysis of 27 studies, containing a total of 10,565 participants, demonstrated that participation in AA/TSMH for alcohol use disorder performed at least as well as established active comparison treatments (e.g. CBT) on all outcomes except for abstinence where it often outperformed other treatments [25]. Humphreys and Moos [26] found that patients treated in cognitive behavioral treatment (CBT) programs had 64% higher annual healthcare costs (p = 0.001), compared to patients in AA/TSMH programs. Psychiatric and substance use outcomes were comparable across treatments, except that AA/TSMH participants had higher abstinence rates (45.7% AA/TSMH versus 36.2% in CBT; P = 0.001). Mundt et al. [27] found that each additional AA meeting attended was associated with an incremental medical cost reduction of 4.7% during 7-year follow-up. Recovery in AA may stem from the ability of the group processes to augment self-efficacy, coping skills, and motivation, and by helping people build supportive and pro-social networks [28].
The large literature on AA is yet to be compared to the scarcer literature on other TSMH groups. In particular, no systematic review and meta-analysis have been performed for TSMH group other than for alcohol use disorder. The aim of this article is to fill-up this gap by providing a systematic review of TSMH groups other than AA, and whatever the addiction targeted by the group is, hence contributing to the growth of dimensional psychiatry. Both qualitative and quantitative studies were included in the review. The four meta-analyses performed were based on those studies which allowed evaluating Pearson correlation between (i) Duration or involvement in TSMH groups; and (ii) Severity of symptoms or quality of life. Since all addictions follow a similar pattern [29], we expected results similar to those demonstrated by Kelly et al. [25] regarding AA/TSMH for alcohol use disorder. That is, significant and negative (respectively, positive) association between higher duration or involvement in TSMH and lower severity of symptoms (respectively, higher quality of life).
Methods
A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidance [30]. Sub-sections show, respectively, search strategy and selection criteria (2.1), data extraction (2.2), quality assessment (2.3) and statistical analysis (2.4).
Search strategy and selection criteria
Figure 1 details the flow of information through the different phases of the review. In the identification stage, two databases (MEDLINE, PsychInfo) and a register (ClinicalTrials) from inception through November 01 2022 (PROSPERO CRD42022342605), with no restrictions on language, were used to obtain peer-reviewed articles that would allow for an analysis of TSMH groups for disorders other than AA. We searched for (i) “12-step group” OR “12-step program” OR “12-step facilitation” OR “12-step approach” NOT alcohol; and (ii) all the “anonymous” TSMH groups listed in Appendix A. Both qualitative and quantitative studies were included in the review. Figure 1 shows the 8 exclusion criteria which, among other reasons, led to exclude studies that (i) mentioned TSMH group only in the introduction or discussion sections; (ii) Did not allow evaluating the efficacy of TSMH groups; (iii) were not based on face-to-face meetings; and (iv) involved the direct participation of a clinician in the meetings.
Data extraction
In the identification stage, the lead author independently scanned the abstract, title or both of every record to determine which studies should be considered for inclusion. Doubts were discussed with other authors. The review team included researchers with specialist background in mental health, psychology, public health, epidemiology, qualitative research, mood and emotional disorders.
In the screening stage, full-text articles were independently evaluated for inclusion by the lead author. Microsoft Excel was used to screen, remove duplicate entries, and record reviewers’ decisions. On completion of database searching, additional records were identified through checking reference lists of each article collected after the screening stage. A data abstraction table (DAT) was designed and piloted. The lead author formed an initial conceptual framework presenting a preliminary synthesis of findings of included studies, the DAT was reviewed by the authors, and refined accordingly. The DAT included information about the name of the main TSMH group studied, author, country of study, participant demographics (age, gender, country, main disease, comorbidities, type and frequency of attendance to TSMH groups), study design, study measures and main results.
The data needed to perform meta-analyses was extracted by the lead author. The corresponding authors were contacted by email when data of relevance for the meta-analysis were insufficient in the published article. If we got no answer at first email, corresponding authors were contacted 2 more times.
Quality assessment
Two distinctive tools were applied to assess the risk of bias of quantitative studies (2.3.1) and qualitative studies (2.3.2).
Quantitative studies
Study quality of quantitative studies was examined adapting the tool used by Strahler et al. [31], a modified set of the quality criteria for primary research, as proposed in the Evidence Analysis Manual of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics [32]. Our final scoring sheet (see Appendix E) included 14 criteria (e.g. sampling adequately described and free from bias, clearly defined outcomes, reliability estimates of measures given, appropriate statistical procedures) with each criterion rated as “positive” if present (= 2 points), “neutral” if the presence is ambiguous or when research is not exceptionally strong on this issue (= 1 point), or “negative” if not present (= 0 point). We computed the quality score as the mean of responses across criteria that could be evaluated. Hence, scores could range between 0 and 2. For most articles, coding was independently performed by the first author. For the 9 studies used in meta-analyses, coding was discussed with the second author until 100% agreement was achieved.
Qualitative studies
Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group recommendations [33] are to use a tool that takes the multi-dimensional nature of qualitative evidence into account. Guided by this perspective, the quality of included studies and risk of bias was assessed using the Critical Appraisals Skills Programme [34]. This tool is the most frequently recommended tool for qualitative studies [35]. The CASP tool focuses on three domains: study design, validity of results, and generalizability. Each domain is assessed using a set of questions. Based on the response to these questions the studies were marked as low, medium, or high quality. Studies which provided satisfactory information in all domains were marked as high quality, with missing or unsatisfactory information in one domain as medium quality, and with missing or unsatisfactory information in two or more domains as low quality.
Statistical analysis
The final effect size analyzed was Pearson correlation r. The four meta-analyses performed were based on the studies which allowed evaluating Pearson correlation between (i) duration or involvement in TSMH groups; and (ii) severity of symptoms or quality of life. No previously published protocol nor pre-registration exists for these meta-analyses. All included studies collected an informed consent; therefore, an ethical approval was not obtained. However, these meta-analyses complied with the most recent version of the Declaration of Helsinki.
Statistical analysis was conducted with the R Software and following the guidelines of Harrer et al. [36]. As we anticipated considerable between-study heterogeneity, a random-effects model was used to pool effect sizes. Inverse variance weighting was applied to increase estimates’ efficiency and give studies that have greater precision more weight. We used Knapp–Hartung adjustments [37] to calculate the confidence interval around the pooled effects.
To assess the heterogeneity and consistency of the estimated correlations, I2 is used along its confidence interval (CI). I2 indicate the percentage of variation caused by heterogeneity. 95% prediction intervals (PI) are also given for each pooled effect. Prediction intervals give a range into which we can expect the effects of future studies to fall based on present evidence. PI are calculated using the heterogeneity variance τ2. The restricted maximum likelihood estimator [38] was used to calculate the heterogeneity variance τ2. For each meta-analysis, I2 was computed when excluding one study (for all possible configurations; leave-one-out analysis), and the case with the lowest I2.When the total number of studies is small, detecting small-study effects is difficult. Egger's regression test is typically not advisable below 10 studies [39], as well as other methods to detect small-study effects/publication bias. In our case, the least worst method was P-curve analysis, which can be performed when between-study heterogeneity is low [36], and for meta-analyses of more than 3 studies.
Results
Sub-sections show, respectively, systematic review and meta-analysis of quantitative studies (3.1) and systematic review of qualitative studies (3.2). Articles using mixed-methods are discussed either in subSect. "Systematic review and meta-analysis of quantitative studies" or subSect. "Systematic review of qualitative studies", where thought to be most relevant. Figure 2 shows the breakdown of the included papers by type of TSMH group. There are a total of 55 included papers, corresponding to 47 distinctive studies.
Systematic review and meta-analysis of quantitative studies
Sub-Sect. "Systematic review and meta-analysis of quantitative studies" depicts the results regarding the systematic review of quantitative studies (3.1.1) and meta-analysis (3.1.2).
Systematic review of quantitative studies
Twenty-three quantitative-only articles (7 cross-sectional studies, 7 cohort studies, 6 randomized control trials, 2 comparative effectiveness research, 1 non-randomized study with a separate control group) and 3 mixed-methods papers are presented in Table 1. All those 26 papers were rated to be of at least moderate quality; scores ranged from 1.25 to 1.83, with a mean of 1.56 (SD 5 0.17). These 26 papers correspond to a total of 22 distinctive studies. Most studies were conducted in North America (n = 15). The mean age is 43.6. Due to research protocol (see 2.1), all these studies aimed to test the impact of duration in TSMH or TSMH involvement on outcomes (e.g. severity of symptoms, quality of life, self-efficacy, self-esteem). They all showed a significant, therapeutical impact on at least one outcome.
Meta-analysis
Studies measuring any severity of symptom measures in relation to duration in TSMH.
We computed the pooled correlation as effect size across the 8 studies examining any severity of symptom measure in relation to duration in TSMH (n = 1,209). The measures used in each study are given in Appendix F, Table 10. The participants’ average age was Mpooled = 40.5 years (SDpooled = 11.16). 81% were male.
The results presented in Table 2, 3 revealed a significant pooled correlation of r = − 0.20 (p < 0.01). The effect size across all studies is shown in Fig. 3. The between-study heterogeneity variance was estimated at τ2 = 0.0081 (95%CI 0.0000–0.0918), with an I2 value of 51% (95% CI 0–78%). The prediction interval ranged from g = − 0.42 to 0.04, indicating that positive correlation cannot be ruled out for future studies. When removing the study with the largest influence on I2, [58], n = 1,227, I2 is 22% (95% CI 0–65%), and prediction interval ranged from g = -0.29 to − 0.14.
Risk of bias across studies
The results of the p-curve analysis are reported in Table 2. When removing [58], I2 = 22% < 50%. Overall, these results indicate the presence of evidential value and that there is a true non-zero effect. We can still not rule out that publication bias has affected the results of our meta-analysis. But, based on p-curve’s results, we can conclude that the pooled effect found is not totally spurious.
Studies measuring any Severity of symptom measures in relation to TSMH involvement.
We computed the pooled correlation as effect size across the 5 studies examining any severity of symptom measure in relation to TSMH involvement (n = 1019). The measures used in each study are given in Appendix F, Table 11. The participants’ average age was Mpooled = 38.8 years (SDpooled = 11.3). 80% were male.
The results presented in Table 3 revealed a non-significant correlation of r = – 0.21 (p = 0.063). The effect size across all studies is shown in Fig. 4. The between-study heterogeneity variance was estimated at τ2 = 0.0237 (95% CI 0.0033; 0.2894), with an I2 value of 76% (95% CI 42–90%). The prediction interval ranged from g = − 0.64 to 0.33, indicating that positive correlation cannot be ruled out for future studies. When removing the study with the largest influence on I2, [45], the pooled correlation is even less significant (see Table 3). However, when removing [58], a significative correlation is found, of r = − 0.25 (p = 0.045). N = 757, I2 is 75% (95% CI 30–91%), and prediction interval ranged from g = − 0.73 to 0.39. No p-curve analysis were led here as I2 is high [36].
Studies measuring any Quality of life measures in relation to Duration in TSMH.
We computed the pooled correlation as effect size across the 3 studies examining any quality of life measure in relation to duration in TSMH (n = 259). The measures used in each study are given in Appendix F (Table 12). The participants’ average age was Mpooled = 37.4 years (SDpooled = 9.8). 80% were male.
The results presented in Table 3 revealed a correlation approaching significance of r = 0.10 (p = 0.052). The effect size across all studies is shown in Fig. 5. The between-study heterogeneity variance was estimated at τ2 = 0 (95% CI 0.0000; 0.0538), with an I2 value of 0% (95% CI 0–90%). The prediction interval ranged from g = − 0.61 to 0.72, indicating that positive correlation cannot be ruled out for future studies. No influential case was removed as there were only 3 studies pooled.
Studies measuring any Quality of life measures in relation to TSMH involvement.
We computed the pooled correlation as effect size across the 3 studies examining any quality of life measure in relation to TSMH involvement (n = 478). The measures used in each study are given in Appendix F (Table 13). The participants’ average age was Mpooled 36.5 years (SDpooled 5 8.7). 80% were male.
The results presented in Table 3 revealed a non-significative correlation of r = 0.28 (p = 0.09). The effect size across all studies is shown in Fig. 6. The between-study heterogeneity variance was estimated at τ2 = 0.0187 (95% CI 0.0000; 1.0119), with an I2 value of 70% (95%CI: 0–91%). The prediction interval ranged from g = − 0.95 to 0.98, indicating that positive correlation cannot be ruled out for future studies. No influential case was removed as there were only 3 studies pooled.
Summary of findings of meta-analyses.
Table 3 summarizes the results that were obtained when pooling Pearson correlation r.
Systematic review of qualitative studies
Twenty-eight qualitative papers and 1 mixed study are presented in Table 4. Of the 28 articles, 12 (41%) were rated high quality, 11 (38%) medium and six (21%) low quality. These articles correspond to a total of 24 distinctive studies. Interviews were used by 14 studies (58%), participant observation by 7 (29%), focus groups by 5 (21%), survey-only by 2 (8%) and case report by 2 (8%). Studies were conducted in North America (n = 17), Middle East (n = 4) and Europe (n = 4). 20 of the 24 studies brought evidence on the factors influencing recovery, highlighting the following: Social (n = 15), emotional (n = 9), spiritual (n = 7), self-identification or psychological (n = 6).
Discussion
Primary outcome was to strengthen knowledge on TSMH groups other than AA, which can be used by support services to inform the development of future research, policy, and practice within healthcare and other settings. Subsection 4.1 provides a summary of the knowledge gathered about the 5 types of TSMH group addressed in this article, each focusing on a specific addiction. The possibility to develop TSMH groups targeting ontological addiction, at the root of all others addictions, is then discussed in SubSect. “TSMH group for the root of all addictions: Ontological addiction?” . Sect. “Discussion” ends with the limitations of this paper.
Summary of the knowledge gathered regarding the five types of TSMH groups studied
Narcotics Anonymous. Over the 55 included papers, 22% deal with NA. However, this systematic review excludes papers which do not allow to distinguishing NA from AA members. The search in Pubmed of “Narcotics Anonymous” AND “Alcoholics Anonymous” gives 83 results (on the 22/12/2022), suggesting that many papers are dealing with both NA and AA without distinction (e.g. Andraka-Christou et al. [94]). Research on the effectiveness of NA show a robust level of evidence: One RCT [44], 2 cross-sectional studies [42, 45], one non-randomized study with a separate control group [41], one cohort study [40] and six qualitative studies [65,66,67,68,69,70]. These studies are generally supportive of NA’s effectiveness. Vederhus and Birkland [70] yet highlights that NA model do not fit all. Besides, NA members may stigmatized patients using buprenorphine [43] and methadone ([43, 95]) for treatment purposes.
Overeaters anonymous. OA is overlooked by the TSMH literature. Over the 55 included papers, there are 1.7 times more GA articles than OA articles. Worldwide, there are 2.4 times more OA than GA meetings (see Appendix D). OA is particularly underrepresented in quantitative studies (12% of total, versus 24% in qualitative studies). Research on the effectiveness of OA is limited to lower levels of evidence: a 2002 dissertation [48], one study comparing effectiveness of OA to weight watchers and multiple sclerosis mutual help groups ([46, 47]), two case reports ([71, 76]) and five qualitative studies ([72,73,74,75, 77, 96]). These studies generally support OA’s effectiveness, and highlight the need for higher quality research, including randomized controlled trials. Future research on OA should rely upon the good quality literature review of Bray et al. [97].
Gamblers anonymous. GA is over studied by the TSMH literature, when considering the number of GA meetings relative to others TSMH (see Appendix D). Over the 55 included papers, 31% deal with GA. Research on the effectiveness of GA show a robust level of evidence: two RCT (which led to 3 articles [51, 52, 55]:), four cross-sectional studies ([49, 50, 53, 54]) and seven qualitative studies (which led to 10 articles [49, 78, 79, 81,82,83,84,85,86,87]:). These studies are generally supportive of GA’s effectiveness. Schuler et al. [98] mitigate these results by indicating that larger RCT are needed to prove the effectiveness of GA either as a control condition or in conjunction with formal treatment or medication. Specificities of GA relative to other TSMH groups include (i) a focus on steps 4 and 9 (see Appendix B for the 12-steps); (ii) devoting much time and energy to counselling members on financial and special challenges; (iii) making direct comments during meetings (relative to others TSMH groups in which members avoid addressing one another directly); (iv) absolute assertion of identity as a ‘‘compulsive gambler’’. Future research on GA should rely upon the good quality scoping review of Schuler et al. [98].
TSMH group for compulsive sexual behavior disorder. Over the 55 included papers, 9% are dealing with a TSMH group for CSBD. Research on the effectiveness of those TSMH groups shows medium level of evidence, with two cross-sectional studies [57, 58], one cohort study [56] and one qualitative research [88]. These studies are generally supportive of TSMH’s effectiveness, by e.g. lowering the sexually related sense of helplessness and narrowing the repression away from sexual thoughts [57]. The tree studies hereafter worth to be noticed, even though not being included in this paper as they do not deal specifically with TSMH experience but rather focus on the recovery from compulsive sexual behaviors. Dhuffar-Pottiwal and Griffiths [99] analyzed recovery experiences of three Sex and Love Addicts Anonymous members from the UK, restricting their sample to female-only participants. Yamamoto [100] analyzed recovery experiences of four heterosexual men from unspecified sex groups. Antons et al. [101] performed a systematic review identifying 24 treatment studies on CSBD and problematic pornography use as well as treatment effects on symptom severity and behavior enactment.
More research (including RCT) on TSMH for CSBD is needed, as CSBD seem to be increasing in several countries ([57, 58, 89, 102]). In 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) included the diagnosis of CSBD as an impulse control disorder in the eleventh revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11; WHO, 2019). In Iran, the number of SA meeting per week grew from 557 in 2016 to 1,246 in 2018 [102]. Future research could consider using the recently developed CSBD Scale (CSBD-19 [104];) that assesses CSBD based on ICD-11 diagnostic guideline. Practitioners may want to activate TSMH group meetings for CSBD in prisons, especially for prisoners of sexual crimes [102].
Double trouble in recovery. DTR is over represented in the TSMH literature. 18% of the 55 included papers deal with DTR. DTR however, has the fewest number of TSMH groups among those studied in this paper. In 2008, there were about 200 DTR groups in the USA across 14 states [61]. The authors are not aware of any DTR groups outside the US. PubMed. Thirteen papers on DTR were published between 2002 and 2015, among which 5 are based on the same study/sample ([21, 59, 60, 62, 105]), and authors are all connected through common institutions, universities or states. There are no published papers since 2015. The current activity level of DTR groups is unclear.
Studies on the effectiveness of DTR show a robust level of evidence: two RCT ([63, 64]), one large (n = 310) cohort study that led to four articles ([21, 59,60,61]), one other cohort study [62], one mixed-method [90] and two qualitative papers ([91, 92]). These studies are generally supportive of DTR’s effectiveness, by offering a place where persons with a dual diagnosis can support, share and educate one another on their comorbidity without fear of stigma [92]. Yet, even though DTR is not widely available, this should not necessarily inhibit healthcare professionals to encourage dual diagnosis patients to attend other TSMH groups, being aware that, “one size does not fit all” [70]. It is important however, that such TSMH groups will be receptive to dual diagnosed patients and will not stigmatize or in any way discriminate against them. As long as this principle is held, the type of TSMH group attended is of secondary importance on the positive therapeutic impact of TSMH ([70, 92, 106]). Following Rosenblum et al. [63], healthcare professionals offering an intensive referral and/or motivation enhancement component might facilitate better attendance at TSMH meetings.
TSMH group for the root of all addictions: ontological addiction?
We advocate that coupling TSMH group with 3rd wave CBT [109], which are specifically designed to cure ontological addiction, is a promising avenue for more efficient, transnosographic TSMH groups. According to ontological addiction theory [107], the root of the suffering of mental unsatisfaction is an addiction to try satisfying an incorrect self-concept. The incorrect self-concept (i) is perceived as intrinsically separated from its surroundings, and from experiences of well-being, safety and worth; and (ii) leads individuals to search for external sources to fill up this perceived lack. The 6 components inherent in any form of addiction [29] can be found in ontological addiction [108]. Significant correlations were found between ontological addiction and depressive symptoms (r = 0.537), anxiety symptoms (r = 0.565) and self-esteem (r = 0.426 [108];). Ontological addiction is at the root of the suffering of mental unsatisfaction, and thus at the root of the suffering experienced by subjects with psychiatric disorders and addictions. Only the form taken by the incorrect self-concept endorsing ontological addiction changes with the addiction.
By opposition to an incorrect self-concept, a correct self-concept conceives of itself as inseparable from others, from its surroundings and from its own experiences of well-being, safety and worth. Curing one’s ontological addiction means to progressively change the self-concept from incorrect to correct. TSMH groups can be advantageous to that regards by providing a space in which (i) People can feel as a part of whole (feeling of connectedness with the group members); (ii) People can progressively start identifying themselves to a helper by providing emotional support and advises. Through the process of changing one’s self-concept from incorrect to correct, the perception one’s have of characteristics inherent to the psychiatric disorder goes from weakness to strength. If designed properly, TSMH groups can help individuals to use these characteristics both to serve's oneself and others instead of using them for self-destruction. Future research should evaluate the efficacy of TSMH groups coupled to 3rd wave CBT to reduce ontological addiction as well as more traditional kind of addictions.
Future TSMH groups could also get inspiration from the neurodiversity’s concept [110]. This concept has helped to favor a positive view of individuals with e.g. autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, dyslexia, depression, anxiety, intellectual disabilities, schizophrenia [111], or stuttering [112]. In the case of individuals with autism, the ability to hyperfocus, attention to detail, good memory, and creativity, as well as honesty, loyalty, and empathy for animals or for other autistic people can be conductive to success for the whole work team, if they are appropriately balanced by consideration of relevant individual weaknesses ([113, 114]). As for individuals with borderline personality disorder, altruism, self-derision, creativity, enthusiasm and probity can be a great asset in any group, provided that the disorder is treated correctly [115].
Limitations
In addition of the limitations discussed previously in Sect. “Discussion”, the main limits of this study must be emphasized. They are caused by:
-
The method applied (see Sect. “Methods”). The eligibility criteria led to exclude papers focusing on (i) Mutual help groups which are not 12 step based, such as SMART ([116, 117]), Seeking Safety ([118, 119]) or Compassionate Friends [120]; (ii) Online or remote TSMH group meetings, which hold a large potential for improving healthcare continuity and access [121, 122] even though they may be less effective than face-to-face meetings in fostering solidarity and sense of belonging [128]. Besides, additional databases such as Web of Science or Science Direct could have been explored. Efforts were made to limit this bias by systematically checking the references of papers.
-
The meta-analysis objective (see Sect. “Quantitative studies”). The pooled effect is correlational, which precludes the ability for causal conclusions. In other words, it is unclear whether e.g. lower severity of symptoms is an outcome of duration in TSMH. Another possibility is that subjects with lower severity of symptoms fell less stigmatized and hence are more keen to seek help and attend TSMH meetings. One RCT and one cross-sectional study showed a causal relationship, from higher attendance to lower severity of symptoms ([53, 64]). More longitudinal studies are yet needed to bidirectional associations over time between TSMH participants.
-
The pooled samples. Among the 4 meta-analysis performed, pooled mean age ranges from 36.5 to 40.5, and 90–81% of pooled subjects were male. Many of the pooled subjects come from countries with a moderate to strong religious history. No study were found on TSMH of people living in Central and South America, while 13% of face-to-face GA, NA and OA meetings are hold there (see Fig. 7).
Conclusions
TSMH attendance and involvement were negatively correlated with severity of symptoms (high and medium levels of evidence) and positively correlated with quality of life (low levels of evidence). It is important to acknowledge that all TSMH have limitations and have been subject to criticism. The question is whether the benefits outweigh the potential risks. Our primary argument is that the answer to this question will depend on proper assessment and classification of the individual, as well as the type of TSMH engaged, and what other treatment services are being received. To reduce potential risks and improve efficacy, we advocate that TSMH group targeting ontological addiction, coupled with third wave CBT, is a promising direction.
Data availability
Data are available upon request by email to the corresponding author.
References
Leigh-Hunt N, Bagguley D, Bash K et al (2017) An overview of systematic reviews on the public health consequences of social isolation and loneliness. Public Health 152:157–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2017.07.035
Santini ZI, Koyanagi A, Tyrovolas S et al (2015) The association between social relationships and depression: a systematic review. J Affect Disord 175:53–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2014.12.049
Kawachi I, Berkman LF (2001) Social ties and mental health. J Urban Health Bull N Y Acad Med 78:458–467. https://doi.org/10.1093/jurban/78.3.458
Mushtaq R, Shoib S, Shah T, Mushtaq S (2014) Relationship between loneliness psychiatric disorders and physical health a review on the psychological aspects of loneliness. J Clin Diagn Res JCDR. https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2014/10077.4828
Chang Y-C, Lee Y-H, Chiang T, Liu C-T (2022) Associations of smoking and alcohol consumption with loneliness, depression, and loss of interest among Chinese older males and females. Int J Ment Health Addict. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-022-00912-z
Jia Y, Liu T, Yang Y (2022) The relationship between real-life social support and Internet addiction among the elderly in China. Front Public Health. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.981307
Rajesh T, Rangaiah B (2022) Relationship between personality traits and facebook addiction: a meta-analysis. Heliyon. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10315
Xu X-P, Liu Q-Q, Li Z-H, Yang W-X (2022) The mediating role of loneliness and the moderating role of gender between peer phubbing and adolescent mobile social media addiction. Int J Environ Res Public Health 19:10176. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191610176
Yue H, Yue X, Zhang X et al (2022) Exploring the relationship between social exclusion and smartphone addiction: the mediating roles of loneliness and self-control. Front Psychol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.945631
Castrén S, Basnet S, Salonen AH et al (2013) Factors associated with disordered gambling in Finland. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy 8:24. https://doi.org/10.1186/1747-597X-8-24
Albano G, Rowlands K, Baciadonna L et al (2019) Interpersonal difficulties in obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis to inform a rejection sensitivity-based model. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 107:846–861. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2019.09.039
Southward MW, Christensen KA, Fettich KC et al (2014) Loneliness mediates the relationship between emotion dysregulation and bulimia nervosa/binge eating disorder psychopathology in a clinical sample. Eat Weight Disord EWD 19:509–513. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40519-013-0083-2
Zhao Z, Ma Y, Han Y et al (2018) Psychosocial Correlates of Food Addiction and Its Association with Quality of Life in a Non-Clinical Adolescent Sample. Nutrients 10:E837. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu10070837
Atadokht A, Hajloo N, Karimi M, Narimani M (2015) The Role of family expressed emotion and perceived social support in predicting addiction relapse. Int J High Risk Behav Addict. https://doi.org/10.5812/ijhrba.21250
Kurtz LF (1997) Self-help and support groups: A handbook for practitioners. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA
Lai DWL, Li J, Ou X, Li CYP (2020) Effectiveness of a peer-based intervention on loneliness and social isolation of older Chinese immigrants in Canada: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Geriatr 20:356. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-020-01756-9
Masi CM, Chen H-Y, Hawkley LC, Cacioppo JT (2011) A Meta-Analysis of Interventions to Reduce Loneliness. Personal Soc Psychol Rev 15:219–266. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868310377394
Wnuk M (2017) Hope as an important factor for mental health in alcohol-dependent subjects attending Alcoholics Anonymous. J Subst Use 22:182–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/14659891.2016.1177612
Gomes K, Hart KE (2009) Adherence to recovery practices prescribed by alcoholics anonymous: benefits to sustained abstinence and subjective quality of life. Alcohol Treat Q 27:223–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/07347320902784874
Oakes KE, Allen JP, Ciarrocchi JW (2000) Spirituality, religious problem-solving, and sobriety in alcoholics anonymous. Alcohol Treat Q 18:37–50. https://doi.org/10.1300/J020v18n02_03
Magura S, Knight EL, Vogel HS et al (2003) Mediators of effectiveness in dual-focus self-help groups. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse 29:301–322. https://doi.org/10.1081/ada-120020514
Gutierrez D (2019) Spiritus contra spiritum: addiction, hope, and the search for meaning. Spiritual Clin Pract 6:229–239. https://doi.org/10.1037/scp0000201
Krentzman AR, Strobbe S, Harris JI et al (2017) Decreased drinking and alcoholics anonymous are associated with different dimensions of spirituality. Psychol Relig Spiritual 9:S40–S48. https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000121
Mathis GM, Ferrari JR, Groh DR, Jason LA (2009) Hope and substance abuse recovery: the impact of agency and pathways within an abstinent communal-living setting. J Groups Addict Recovery 4:42–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/15560350802712389
Kelly JF, Abry A, Ferri M, Humphreys K (2020) Alcoholics Anonymous and 12-step facilitation treatments for alcohol use disorder: a distillation of a 2020 cochrane review for Clinicians and policy makers. Alcohol Alcohol 55:641–651. https://doi.org/10.1093/alcalc/agaa050
Humphreys K, Moos R (2001) Can encouraging substance abuse patients to participate in self-help groups reduce demand for health care? a quasi-experimental study. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 25:711–716
Mundt MP, Parthasarathy S, Chi FW et al (2012) 12-Step Participation reduces medical use costs among adolescents with a history of alcohol and other drug treatment. Drug Alcohol Depend 126:124–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2012.05.002
Kelly JF, Magill M, Stout RL (2009) How do people recover from alcohol dependence? a systematic review of the research on mechanisms of behavior change in Alcoholics Anonymous. Addict Res Theory 17:236–259. https://doi.org/10.1080/16066350902770458
Griffiths M (2005) A ‘components’ model of addiction within a biopsychosocial framework. J Subst Use 10:191–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/14659890500114359
Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM et al (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Strahler J, Wachten H, Mueller-Alcazar A (2021) Obsessive healthy eating and orthorexic eating tendencies in sport and exercise contexts: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Behav Addict 10:456–470. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.2021.00004
Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (2016) Evidence analysis manual: Steps in the academy evidence analysis process. Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. Retrieved March, 3rd, 2020 from https://www.andeal.org/vault/2440/web/files/2016_April_ EA_Manual.pdf.
Carroll C, Booth A (2015) Quality assessment of qualitative evidence for systematic review and synthesis: Is it meaningful, and if so, how should it be performed? Res Synth Methods 6:149–154. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1128
CASP (2022) Critical appraisal skills programme tool. WebSite: https://casp-uk.net/ (Accessed the 30/08/2022)
Ma L-L, Wang Y-Y, Yang Z-H et al (2020) Methodological quality (risk of bias) assessment tools for primary and secondary medical studies: what are they and which is better? Mil Med Res 7:7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40779-020-00238-8
Harrer M, Cuijpers P, Furukawa TA, Ebert DD (2021) Doing Meta-Analysis with R: A Hands-On Guide. Boca Raton, FL and London: Chapman and Hall/CRC Press. ISBN 978-0-367-61007-4
Knapp G, Hartung J (2003) Improved tests for a random effects meta-regression with a single covariate. Stat Med 22:2693–2710. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.1482
Viechtbauer W (2005) Bias and efficiency of meta-analytic variance estimators in the random-effects model. J Educ Behav Stat 30:261–293. https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986030003261
Sterne JA, Gavaghan D, Egger M (2000) Publication and related bias in meta-analysis: power of statistical tests and prevalence in the literature. J Clin Epidemiol 53:1119–1129. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0895-4356(00)00242-0
Toumbourou JW, Hamilton M, U’Ren A et al (2002) Narcotics Anonymous participation and changes in substance use and social support. J Subst Abuse Treat 23:61–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0740-5472(02)00243-x
Chen G (2006) Social support, spiritual program, and addiction recovery. Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol 50:306–323. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X05279038
Galanter M, Dermatis H, Post S, Sampson C (2013) Spirituality-based recovery from drug addiction in the twelve-step fellowship of narcotics anonymous. J Addict Med 7:189–195. https://doi.org/10.1097/ADM.0b013e31828a0265
Monico LB, Gryczynski J, Mitchell SG et al (2015) Buprenorphine treatment and 12-step meeting attendance: conflicts, compatibilities, and patient outcomes. J Subst Abuse Treat 57:89–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsat.2015.05.005
Azkhosh M, Farhoudianm A, Saadati H et al (2016) Comparing acceptance and commitment group therapy and 12-steps narcotics anonymous in addict’s rehabilitation process: a randomized controlled trial. Iran J Psychiatry 11:244–249
Galanter M, White WL, Hunter BD (2019) Cross-cultural applicability of the 12-step model: a comparison of narcotics anonymous in the USA and Iran. J Addict Med 13:493–499. https://doi.org/10.1097/ADM.0000000000000526
Maton KI (1988) Social support, organizational characteristics, psychological well-being, and group appraisal in three self-help group populations. Am J Community Psychol 16:53–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00906072
Maton KI (1989) Towards an ecological understanding of mutual-help groups: the social ecology of “fit.” Am J Community Psychol 17:729–753. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00922736
Kriz KLM (2002) The Efficacy of Overeaters Anonymous in Fostering Abstinence in Binge-Eating Disorder and Bulimia Nervosa. PhD in Counselor Education, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Available online at: http:// theses.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-05092002–143548/
Petry NM (2003) Patterns and correlates of Gamblers Anonymous attendance in pathological gamblers seeking professional treatment. Addict Behav 28:1049–1062. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0306-4603(02)00233-2
Cooper G (2004) Exploring and understanding online assistance for problem gamblers: the pathways disclosure model. ECommunity Int J Ment Health Addict. https://doi.org/10.1175/PRISM/9505
Petry NM, Ammerman Y, Bohl J et al (2006) Cognitive-behavioral therapy for pathological gamblers. J Consult Clin Psychol 74:555–567. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.74.3.555
Petry NM, Litt MD, Kadden R, Ledgerwood DM (2007) Do coping skills mediate the relationship between cognitive-behavioral therapy and reductions in gambling in pathological gamblers? Addict Abingdon Engl 102:1280–1291. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2007.01907.x
Oei TPS, Gordon LM (2008) Psychosocial factors related to gambling abstinence and relapse in members of gamblers anonymous. J Gambl Stud 24:91–105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-007-9071-7
Gomes K, Pascual-Leone A (2009) Primed for change: facilitating factors in problem gambling treatment. J Gambl Stud 25:1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-008-9111-y
Grant JE, Donahue CB, Odlaug BL, Kim SW (2011) A 6-month follow-up of imaginal desensitization plus motivational interviewing in the treatment of pathological gambling. Ann Clin Psychiatry Off J Am Acad Clin Psychiatr 23:3–10
Wright PJ (2010) Sexual compulsivity and 12-step peer and sponsor supportive communication: a cross-lagged panel analysis. Sex Addict Compulsivity 17:154–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/10720161003796123
Efrati Y, Gola M (2018) Compulsive sexual behavior: a twelve-step therapeutic approach. J Behav Addict 7:445–453. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.7.2018.26
Wnuk M, Charzyńska E (2022) Involvement in Sexaholics Anonymous and life satisfaction: the mediating role of meaning in life and hope. J Behav Addict. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.2022.00024
Laudet AB, Cleland CM, Magura S et al (2004) Social support mediates the effects of dual-focus mutual aid groups on abstinence from substance use. Am J Community Psychol 34:175–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-004-7413-5
Magura S, Cleland C, Vogel HS et al (2007) Effects of “dual focus” mutual aid on self-efficacy for recovery and quality of life. Adm Policy Ment Health 34:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-006-0091-x
Magura S, Villano CL, Rosenblum A et al (2008) Consumer evaluation of dual focus mutual aid. J Dual Diagn 4:170–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/15504260802067032
Magura S, Rosenblum A, Villano CL et al (2008) Dual-focus mutual aid for co-occurring disorders: a quasi-experimental outcome evaluation study. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse 34:61–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/00952990701764623
Rosenblum A, Matusow H, Fong C et al (2014) Efficacy of dual focus mutual aid for persons with mental illness and substance misuse. Drug Alcohol Depend 135:78–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2013.11.012
Bogenschutz MP, Rice SL, Tonigan JS et al (2014) 12-step facilitation for the dually diagnosed: a randomized clinical trial. J Subst Abuse Treat 46:403–411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsat.2013.12.009
Ronel N (1997) The universality of a self-help program of American origin: narcotics anonymous in Israel. Soc Work Health Care 25:87–101. https://doi.org/10.1300/J010v25n03_08
Green LL, Fullilove MT, Fullilove RE (2005) Remembering the lizard: Reconstructing sexuality in the rooms of narcotics anonymous. J Sex Res 42:28–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490509552254
Christensen P (2017) The program is perfect. Med Anthropol Theory. https://doi.org/10.17157/mat.4.5.319
Jalali R, Moradi A, Dehghan F et al (2019) The exploration of factors related to treatment retention in Narcotics Anonymous members: a qualitative study. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy 14:14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-019-0205-6
Dekkers A, Vos S, Vanderplasschen W (2020) “Personal recovery depends on NA unity”: an exploratory study on recovery-supportive elements in narcotics anonymous flanders. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy 15:53. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-020-00296-0
Vederhus J-K, Høie M, Birkeland B (2020) One size doesn’t fit all: a thematic analysis of interviews with people who have stopped participating in Narcotics Anonymous in Norway. Addict Sci Clin Pract 15:18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13722-020-00191-w
Yeary J (1987) The use of overeaters anonymous in the treatment of eating disorders. J Psychoactive Drugs 19:303–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.1987.10472417
Weiner S (1998) The addiction of overeating: self-help groups as treatment models. J Clin Psychol 54:163–167. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097-4679(199802)54:2%3c163::aid-jclp5%3e3.0.co;2-t
Wasson DH, Jackson M (2004) An analysis of the role of overeaters anonymous in women’s recovery from bulimia nervosa. Eat Disord 12:337–356. https://doi.org/10.1080/10640260490521442
Russell-Mayhew S, von Ranson KM, Masson PC (2010) How does overeaters anonymous help its members? a qualitative analysis. Eur Eat Disord Rev J Eat Disord Assoc 18:33–42. https://doi.org/10.1002/erv.966
Hertz P, Addaad M, Ronel N (2012) Attachment styles and changes among women members of overeaters anonymous who have recovered from binge-eating disorder. Health Soc Work 37:110–122. https://doi.org/10.1093/hsw/hls019
Rodríguez-Martín BC, Martín-García M, Martínez-Infiesta I et al (2020) Treating anorexia as addiction: a case study with 2-Years of follow-Up. J Psychiatry Psychiatr Disord 4:94–100
Martin DD (2002) From appearance tales to oppression tales: frame alignment and organizational identity. J Contemp Ethnogr 31:158–206. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241602031002003
Cromer G (1978) Gamblers Anonymous in Israel: a participant observation study of a self-help group. Int J Addict 13:1069–1077. https://doi.org/10.3109/10826087809039327
Browne BR (1991) The selective adaptation of the alcoholics anonymous program by Gamblers Anonymous. J Gambl Stud 7:187–206. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01019873
Ferentzy P, Skinner W, Antze P (2004) Gender differences in Gamblers Anonymous. Int J Self Help Self Care 2:271–280. https://doi.org/10.2190/4A25-MBXK-81UX-JLVA
Ferentzy P, Skinner W, Antze P (2006) Rediscovering the twelve steps. J Groups Addict Recovery 1:59–74. https://doi.org/10.1300/J384v01n03_05
Straus B (2006) Some words about comments. J Groups Addict Recovery 1:75–111. https://doi.org/10.1300/J384v01n03_06
Ferentzy P, Skinner W, Antze P (2009) Gamblers ANONYMOUS and the 12 steps: How an informal society has altered a recovery process in accordance with the special needs of problem gamblers. J Gambl Issues 23:42–65
Ferentzy P, Skinner W, Antze P (2010) The serenity prayer: secularism and spirituality in gamblers anonymous. J Groups Addict Recovery 5:124–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/15560351003766125
Ferentzy P, Skinner W, Antze P (2010) Changing spousal roles and their effect on recovery in gamblers anonymous: GamAnon, social support, wives and husbands. J Gambl Stud 26:487–501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-009-9167-3
Avery L, Davis DR (2008) Women’s recovery from compulsive gambling: formal and informal supports. J Soc Work Pract Addict 8:171–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332560802156919
Laracy AJ, (2011) The promise of another spin: Identity and stigma among video lottery players in St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador, (AAIMR88011). Memorial University of Newfoundland.
Ševčíková A, Blinka L, Soukalová V (2018) Excessive internet use for sexual purposes among members of sexaholics anonymous and sex addicts anonymous. Sex Addict Compulsivity 25:65–79. https://doi.org/10.1080/10720162.2018.1431166
Fernandez DP, Kuss DJ, Griffiths MD (2021) Lived Experiences of recovery from compulsive sexual behavior among members of sex and love addicts anonymous: a qualitative thematic analysis. Sex Health Compulsivity 28:47–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/26929953.2021.1997842
Vogel HS, Knight E, Laudet A, Magura S (1998) Double-trouble in recovery: self-help for people with dual diagnoses. Psychiatr Rehabil J 21:356–364
Matusow H, Guarino H, Rosenblum A et al (2013) Consumers’ experiences in dual focus mutual aid for co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders. Subst Abuse Res Treat 7:39–47. https://doi.org/10.4137/SART.S11006
Hagler KJ, Rice SL, Muñoz RE et al (2015) “It might actually Work This Time”: benefits and barriers to adapted 12-step facilitation therapy and mutual-help group attendance from the perspective of dually diagnosed individuals. J Addict Nurs. https://doi.org/10.1097/JAN.0000000000000083
Amorelli C, Yancosek K, Morris R (2019) Amputees Unanimous: A 12-step program. Prosthet Orthot Int 43:293–300. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309364619836027
Andraka-Christou B, Totaram R, Randall-Kosich O (2022) Stigmatization of medications for opioid use disorder in 12-step support groups and participant responses. Subst Abuse 43:415–424. https://doi.org/10.1080/08897077.2021.1944957
McGonagle D (1994) Methadone anonymous: a 12-step program. reducing the stigma of methadone use. J Psychosoc Nurs Ment Health Serv 32:5–12. https://doi.org/10.3928/0279-3695-19941001-04
von Ranson KM, Russell-Mayhew SK, Masson PC (2011) An exploratory study of eating disorder psychopathology among overeaters anonymous members. Eat Weight Disord EWD 16:e65-68. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03327524
Bray B, Rodríguez-Martín BC, Wiss DA et al (2021) Overeaters anonymous: an overlooked intervention for binge eating disorder. Int J Environ Res Public Health 18:7303. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18147303
Schuler A, Ferentzy P, Turner NE et al (2016) Gamblers anonymous as a recovery pathway: a scoping review. J Gambl Stud 32:1261–1278. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-016-9596-8
Dhuffar-Pottiwal M, Griffiths M (2015) Understanding conceptualisations of female sex addiction and recovery using interpretative phenomenological analysis. Psychol Reseach. https://doi.org/10.1725/2159-5542/2015.10.001
Yamamoto M (2020) Recovery from hypersexual disorder (HD): an examination of the effectiveness of combination treatment. Sex Addict Compulsivity 27:211–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/10720162.2020.1815267
Antons S, Engel J, Briken P et al (2022) Treatments and interventions for compulsive sexual behavior disorder with a focus on problematic pornography use: a preregistered systematic review. J Behav Addict. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.2022.00061
Mohseni F, Behnam SG, Rafaiee R (2021) The help seeking sex addicted patients increase in iran: a report from iran’s sexaholics anonymous. Iran J Public Health. https://doi.org/10.1802/ijph.v50i10.7524
WHO (World Health Organization) (2019) ICD-11: International classification of diseases (11th ed.). Website : https://icd.who.int/browse11/l-m/en#/http%3a%2f%2fid.who.int%2ficd%2fentity%2f1630268048 (Accessed the 28/09/2022)
Bőthe B, Potenza MN, Griffiths MD et al (2020) The development of the compulsive sexual behavior disorder scale (CSBD-19): An ICD-11 based screening measure across three languages. J Behav Addict 9:247–258. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.2020.00034
Magura S, Laudet AB, Mahmood D et al (2002) Adherence to medication regimens and participation in dual-focus self-help groups. Psychiatr Serv Wash DC 53:310–316. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.53.3.310
Kelly JF, Greene MC, Bergman BG (2014) Do Drug-dependent patients attending alcoholics anonymous rather than narcotics anonymous do as well? a prospective, lagged, matching analysis. Alcohol Alcohol Oxf Oxfs 49:645–653. https://doi.org/10.1093/alcalc/agu066
Gordon WV, Shonin E, Diouri S et al (2018) Ontological addiction theory: attachment to me, mine, and I. J Behav Addict 7:892–896. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.7.2018.45
Barrows P, Shonin E, Sapthiang S et al (2022) The development and validation of the ontological addiction scale. Int J Ment Health Addict. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-022-00840-y
Dahl CJ, Lutz A, Davidson RJ (2015) Reconstructing and deconstructing the self: Cognitive mechanisms in meditation practice. Trends Cogn Sci 19:515–523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2015.07.001
Dwyer P (2022) The neurodiversity approach(es): what are they and what do they mean for researchers? Hum Dev 66:73–92. https://doi.org/10.1159/000523723
Armstrong T (2010) Neurodiversity: Discovering the extraordinary gifts of autism, ADHD, dyslexia, and other brain differences. Da Capo Press
Constantino CD (2018) What can stutterers learn from the neurodiversity movement? Semin Speech Lang 39:382–396. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1667166
Goldfarb Y, Gal E, Golan O (2019) A conflict of interests: a motivational perspective on special interests and employment success of adults with asd. j autism dev disord 49:3915–3923. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-019-04098-7
Russell G, Kapp SK, Elliott D et al (2019) Mapping the autistic advantage from the accounts of adults diagnosed with Autism: a qualitative study. Autism Adulthood 1:124–133. https://doi.org/10.1089/aut.2018.0035
Tortosa A (2019) Borderline personality disorder. Emophania or emophany, a “positive” borderline disorder’s view. Website: https://aapel.org/bdp/BLemophaniaUS.html (Accessed the 05/10/2022)
Beck AK, Forbes E, Baker AL et al (2017) Systematic review of SMART recovery: outcomes, process variables, and implications for research. Psychol Addict Behav J Soc Psychol Addict Behav 31:1–20. https://doi.org/10.1037/adb0000237
Kelly PJ, McCreanor K, Beck AK et al (2021) SMART Recovery International and COVID-19: expanding the reach of mutual support through online groups. J Subst Abuse Treat. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsat.2021.108568
Crisanti AS, Murray-Krezan C, Reno J, Killough C (2019) Effectiveness of peer-delivered trauma treatment in a rural community: a randomized non-inferiority trial. Community Ment Health J 55:1125–1134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10597-019-00443-3
Crisanti AS, Reno J, Salvador JG et al (2019) Perceived helpfulness of peer-delivered trauma specific treatment: a randomized controlled trial. Psychol Serv 16:425–432. https://doi.org/10.1037/ser0000281
Videka-Sherman L (1982) Effects of participation in a self-help group for bereaved parents: compassionate friends. Prev Hum Serv 1:69–77. https://doi.org/10.1300/J293v01n03_07
Galanter M, White WL, Hunter B (2022) Virtual twelve step meeting attendance during the COVID-19 period: a study of members of narcotics anonymous. J Addict Med 16:e81–e86. https://doi.org/10.1097/ADM.0000000000000852
Penfold KL, Ogden J (2021) Exploring the experience of Gamblers Anonymous meetings during COVID-19: a qualitative study. Curr Psychol N B N. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-02089-5
AA (2022) Alcoholics Anonymous. WebSite: https://www.aa.org/ (Accessed the 22/09/2022)
GA (2022) Gamblers Anonymous. WebSite: https://gamblersanonymous.org/ga/ (Accessed the 22/09/2022)
Magura S (2008) Effectiveness of dual focus mutual aid for co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders: a review and synthesis of the “Double Trouble” in Recovery evaluation. Subst Use Misuse 43:1904–1926. https://doi.org/10.1080/10826080802297005
NA (2022) Narcotics Anonymous. WebSite: https://www.na.org/ (Accessed the 22/09/2022)
OA (2022) Overeaters Anonymous. Website: https://www.oa.org/ (Accessed the 22/09/2022). Accessed 14 Sep 2022
SA (2022) Sexaholics Anonymous. WebSite: https://www.sa.org/ (Accessed the 22/09/2022)
Funding
The study was supported by the Therapy Center for Mood and Emotional Disorders, Department of adult psychiatry, La Colombière, CHU Montpellier, France.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
ML drafted the manuscript, performed the data collection process, analyzed the risk of bias of all included papers and led the meta-analyses. DD evaluates the risk of bias of the 8 studies included in the meta-analysis. DD, PC and EO supervised ML throughout all the process by providing advises and feedbacks. All authors contributed critically to the text and all approved the final version of the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
ML, DD, PC and EO declare no conflict of interest.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Leurent, M., Ducasse, D., Courtet, P. et al. Efficacy of 12-step mutual-help groups other than Alcoholics Anonymous: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 274, 375–422 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00406-023-01667-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00406-023-01667-x