Ebbesen Josefsen (needpatch5)

42, p = .08; RMSEA = 0.034 [90% CI 0.000, 0.060], CFI = 0.992) and was measurement invariant across sex. Incentive salience was associated with drinking patterns (e.g., drinks per day, r = 0.447 [95% CI 0.379, 0.514]); reasons for drinking (urges/temptation r = 0.529 [95% CI 0.460, 0.599]); testing personal control, r = 0.384 (95% CI 0.308, 0.461); social pressure, r = 0.549 (95% CI 0.481, 0.617); and family history of AUD, r = 0.134. The incentive salience factor demonstrated greater predictive validity for drinking outcomes compared to alternative preexisting scales. Overall, this study provides support for the construct validity and measurement invariance of the ANA incentive salience construct in a sample of individuals seeking AUD treatment. Many people drop out of substance use disorder (SUD) treatment within the first few sessions, which suggests the need for innovative strategies to address this. We examined the effectiveness of incentive-based contracting for Maine's publicly funded outpatient (OP) and intensive outpatient (IOP) SUD treatment, to determine its potential for improving treatment engagement and retention. Maine's incentive-based contract with federally block grant-funded OP and IOP treatment agencies created a natural experiment, in which we could compare treatment engagement and retention with a group of state-licensed treatment agencies that were not part of the incentive-based contract. We used administrative data for OP (N=18,375) and IOP (N=5986) SUD treatment admissions from FY2005-FY2011 to capture trends prior to and after the FY2008 contract implementation date. We performed multivariable difference-in-difference logistic regression models following propensity score matching of clients. Two-thirds (66%) of OP admimeasures, adding to the body of evidence that shows few or null results for value-based purchasing in SUD treatment programs. The limited success of such efforts is likely to reflect the bandwidth that providers and programs have to focus on new endeavors, the importance of the incentive funding to their bottom line, and forces beyond their immediate control. We found little to no impact of the incentive-based contract on the treatment engagement, retention, and completion measures, adding to the body of evidence that shows few or null results for value-based purchasing in SUD treatment programs. The limited success of such efforts is likely to reflect the bandwidth that providers and programs have to focus on new endeavors, the importance of the incentive funding to their bottom line, and forces beyond their immediate control. Co-occurrence of tobacco use and heavy episodic drinking (HED; 5+ drinks for men and 4+ drinks for women per occasion) is common among young adults; both warrant attention and intervention. In a two-group randomized pilot trial, we investigated whether a Facebook-based smoking cessation intervention addressing both alcohol and tobacco use would increase smoking abstinence and reduce HED compared to a similar intervention addressing only tobacco. Participants were 179 young adults (age 18-25; 49.7% male; 80.4% non-Hispanic white) recruited from Facebook and Instagram who reported smoking 4+ days/week and past-month HED. The Smoking Tobacco and Drinking (STAND) intervention (N=84) and the Tobacco Status Project (TSP), a tobacco-only intervention (N=95), both included daily Facebook posts for 90days and weekly live counseling sessions in private "secret" groups. We verified self-reported 7-day smoking abstinence via remote salivary cotinine tests at 3, 6, and 12months (with retention at 83%, 66%, and 84%, re behavioral changes. Adding an alcohol treatment component to a tobacco cessation social media intervention was acceptable and engaging but did not result in significant differences by treatment condition in smoking or alcohol use outcomes. Participants in both conditions reported smoking and drinking le