Alcohol Interventions for College Students Improves Antecedents of Behavioral Change: Results from a Meta-Analysis of 34 Randomized Controlled Trials

Scott-Sheldon, Lori A. J.; DeMartini, Kelly S.; Carey, Kate B.; Carey, Michael P.

doi:10.1521/jscp.2009.28.7.799

Cited by 19 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These effect estimates are of the same order of magnitude as those reported in previous meta-analyses examining similar interventions for youth (e.g., Jensen et al, 2011; Scott-Sheldon et al, 2009; Tait & Hulse, 2003). The primary strengths of this meta-analysis are the large number of studies included and the application of statistical techniques that permit inclusion of multiple effect sizes from each study.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

“…The one meta-analysis of which we are aware that focused exclusively on brief interventions for adolescents found a moderate positive benefit for alcohol use outcomes (Cohen’s d̄ =0.28), but included only 11 studies (Tait & Hulse, 2003). Although several existing meta-analyses have focused on alcohol interventions for college-age students (e.g., Carey et al, 2007; Carey et al, 2009; Fachini, Aliane, Martinez, & Furtado, 2012; Moreira, Smith, & Foxcroft, 2009; Scott-Sheldon, DeMartini, Carey, & Carey, 2009), most of these reviews either included brief interventions among other types of alcohol interventions, or only focused on a specific branded intervention program (e.g., Brief Alcohol Screening and Intervention for College Students [BASICS]). The most comprehensive meta-analysis to date (Carey et al, 2007) focused on 62 studies of individually delivered alcohol interventions for college students and reported positive effects for alcohol outcomes ( d̄ =0.17-0.18), although these effects were significantly attenuated over longer follow-up periods.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Brief Alcohol Interventions for Adolescents and Young Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Tanner‐Smith

Lipsey

2015

Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment

409

317

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study reports findings from a meta-analysis summarizing the effectiveness of brief alcohol interventions for adolescents (age 11-18) and young adults (age 19-30). We identified 185 eligible study samples using a comprehensive literature search and synthesized findings using random-effects meta-analyses with robust standard errors. Overall, brief alcohol interventions led to significant reductions in alcohol consumption and alcohol-related problems among adolescents (ḡ = 0.27 and ḡ = 0.19) and young adults (ḡ = 0.17 and ḡ = 0.11). These effects persisted for up to one year after intervention and did not vary across participant demographics, intervention length, or intervention format. However, certain intervention modalities (e.g., motivational interviewing) and components (e.g., decisional balance, goal-setting exercises) were associated with larger effects. We conclude that brief alcohol interventions yield beneficial effects on alcohol-related outcomes for adolescents and young adults that are modest but potentially worthwhile given their brevity and low cost.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brief Alcohol Interventions for Adolescents and Young Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Tanner‐Smith

Lipsey

2015

Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment

409

317

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although smaller in magnitude, the benefits for young adults were also positive and significant, associated with a 0.15 a standard deviation improvement in outcomes. These average effect estimates are of the same order of magnitude as those reported in previous meta-analyses examining similar interventions for youth (10, 14, 37–38, 14). …”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

A meta-analysis of brief alcohol interventions for adolescents and young adults: variability in effects across alcohol measures

Tanner‐Smith

Risser

2016

The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Brief alcohol interventions are one approach for reducing drinking among youth, but may vary in effectiveness depending on the type of alcohol assessments used to measure effects. Objectives To conduct a meta-analysis that examined the effectiveness of brief alcohol interventions for adolescents and young adults, with particular emphasis on exploring variability in effects across outcome measurement characteristics. Method Eligible studies were those using an experimental or quasi-experimental design to examine the effects of a brief alcohol intervention on a post-intervention alcohol use measure for youth ages 11–30. A comprehensive literature review identified 190 unique samples that were included in the meta-analysis. Taking a Bayesian approach, we used random-effects multilevel models to estimate the average effect and model variability across outcome measurement types. Results Brief alcohol interventions led to significant reductions in self-reported alcohol use among adolescents ( trueg¯ = 0.25, 95% CrI [0.13, 0.37]) and young adults ( trueg¯ = 0.15, 95% CrI [0.12, 0.18]). These results were consistent across outcomes with varying reference periods, but varied across outcome construct type and assessment instruments. Among adolescents, effects were larger when measured using the Timeline Followback; among young adults, effects were smaller when measured using the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test. Conclusion The strength of the beneficial effects of brief alcohol interventions on youth’s alcohol use may vary depending upon the outcome measure utilized. Nevertheless, significant effects were observed across measures. Although effects were modest in size, they were clinically significant and show promise for interrupting problematic alcohol use trajectories among youth.

show abstract

“…This database, which was last updated in May 2010, has produced a number of comprehensive meta-analyses examining the efficacy of alcohol interventions for college students (Carey et al, 2007; Carey, Scott-Sheldon, Elliott, Bolles, & Carey, 2009; Carey et al, 2012; Scott-Sheldon, Carey, Elliott, Garey, & Carey, 2014; Scott-Sheldon et al, 2009; Scott-Sheldon, Terry, Carey, Garey, & Carey, 2012). Next, relevant articles published and dissertations defended between January 1, 2010 and January 18, 2014 were identified.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recent reviews have described the magnitude of intervention-induced change in alcohol-related behavior, consequences, and psychosocial constructs (e.g., Carey et al, 2012; Scott-Sheldon, Demartini, Carey, & Carey, 2009). However, the extent of support for the mechanisms through which college alcohol interventions reduce drinking has not been examined.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Interventions to reduce college student drinking: State of the evidence for mechanisms of behavior change

Reid

Carey

2015

Clinical Psychology Review

Self Cite

158

134

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interventions to reduce college student drinking, although efficacious, generally yield only small effects on behavior change. Examining mechanisms of change may help to improve the magnitude of intervention effects by identifying effective and ineffective active ingredients. Informed by guidelines for establishing mechanisms of change, we conducted a systematic review of alcohol interventions for college students to identify (a) which constructs have been examined and received support as mediators, (b) circumstances that enhance the likelihood of detecting mediation, and (c) the extent of evidence for mechanisms of change. We identified 61 trials that examined 22 potential mediators of intervention efficacy. Descriptive norms consistently mediated normative feedback interventions. Motivation to change consistently failed to mediate motivational interviewing interventions. Multiple active ingredient interventions were not substantially more likely to find evidence of mediation than single ingredient interventions. Delivering intervention content remotely reduced likelihood of finding support for mediation. With the exception of descriptive norms, there is inadequate evidence for the psychosocial constructs purported as mechanisms of change in the college drinking literature. Evidence for mechanisms will be yielded by future studies that map all active ingredients to targeted psychosocial outcomes and that assess potential mediators early, inclusively, and at appropriate intervals following interventions.

show abstract

Alcohol Interventions for College Students Improves Antecedents of Behavioral Change: Results from a Meta-Analysis of 34 Randomized Controlled Trials

Cited by 19 publications

References 64 publications

Brief Alcohol Interventions for Adolescents and Young Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Brief Alcohol Interventions for Adolescents and Young Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

A meta-analysis of brief alcohol interventions for adolescents and young adults: variability in effects across alcohol measures

Interventions to reduce college student drinking: State of the evidence for mechanisms of behavior change

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About