Brief Addiction Monitor-Taiwan version as a simple tool for the measurement-based care of people who use drugs in the era of harm reduction: predictive validity in prospective follow-ups of patients nationwide

AI Summary

BAM-T demonstrated excellent reliability: interrater ICCR 0.855 and one-week test-retest ICCR 0.789.
Higher baseline BAM-T scores predicted greater odds of loss to follow-up in a nationwide cohort.
Each 1-SD (7.9 points) baseline increase associated with +5.21 points at 3 months and +4.95 points at 6 months, robust after IPW.

Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2026 May 14. doi: 10.1186/s13011-026-00737-2. Online ahead of print.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The Brief Addiction Monitor (BAM) is a simple tool for the periodic assessment of substance use disorders, but whether it can be applied in non-US settings is unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the reliability of a translated version of the BAM, named the BAM-Taiwan (BAM-T), and examine whether the baseline BAM-T score was associated with being lost to follow-up or with changes in the score at 3 months and 6 months, respectively.

METHODS: A total of 2336 participants recruited from people who use drugs enrolled in treatment programs nationwide were followed up at 3 months and 6 months. Within this cohort, intraclass correlation reliability (ICCR) of interview responses was used to assess interrater reliability in 127 participants and test-retest reliability in 102 participants. To evaluate predictive validity, we examined associations between baseline BAM-T total score and follow-up outcomes, including loss to follow-up and subsequent BAM-T severity, using multivariable regression models. To account for informative loss to follow-up, stabilized inverse probability-weighted (IPW) linear regression models were applied.

RESULTS: The BAM-T total score demonstrated excellent interrater (ICCR = 0.855) and 1-week test-retest reliability (ICCR = 0.789). Higher baseline BAM-T total score was associated with increased odds of loss to follow-up and with higher BAM-T total scores at both 3-month and 6-month follow-up. These associations remained robust in IPW-weighted analyses accounting for informative loss to follow-up. Each 1-SD increase in baseline BAM-T total score (7.9 points) was associated with a 5.21-point (robust SE = 0.18) higher BAM-T total score at 3 months (95% CI, 4.85-5.57; p < 0.0001) and a 4.95-point (robust SE = 0.21) higher score at 6 months (95% CI, 4.54-5.36; p < 0.0001) after adjustment for key sociodemographic and clinical covariates.

CONCLUSIONS: Our results provide empirical support for the utility of BAM-T as a simple tool for the measurement-based care of patients who use various types of drugs.

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.

PMID:42135830 | DOI:10.1186/s13011-026-00737-2

Document this CPD