Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23022767›Full record

SynthesisClinical psychology review2012

Face-to-face versus computer-delivered alcohol interventions for college drinkers: a meta-analytic review, 1998 to 2010.

Kate B Carey, Lori A J Scott-Sheldon, Jennifer C Elliott, Lorra Garey, Michael P Carey

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical psychology review, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 171 papers, 21 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
171citing papers in PubMed, 21 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

171 citing papers in PubMed, 21 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Digital versus nondigital behavioral interventions on cardiovascular risk reduction: systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2025
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Behavior Change Techniques Used in Digital Behavior Change Interventions to Reduce Excessive Alcohol Consumption: A Meta-regression.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2018
    Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Alcohol interventions for mandated college students: A meta-analytic review.Journal of consulting and clinical psychology · 2016
    Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Pooled it
  20. Project INTEGRATE: An integrative study of brief alcohol interventions for college students.Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors · 2015
    Pooled it

111 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Kate B CareyCenter for Alcohol and Addiction Studies, Brown University, Providence, RI 02912, USA. kate_carey@brown.edu
Lori A J Scott-Sheldon
Jennifer C Elliott
Lorra Garey
Michael P Carey

Funding

BRIEF INTERVENTIONS FOR BINGE DRINKING COLLEGE STUDENTSR01AA012518 · NIAAA · SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY · PI CAREY, KATE B · 2000 to 2014
$5.1M
NIAAA NIH HHS R01 AA012518NIAAA NIH HHS R01-AA012518
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Alcohol misuse occurs commonly on college campuses, necessitating prevention programs to help college drinkers reduce consumption and minimize harmful consequences. Computer-delivered interventions (CDIs) have been widely used due to their low cost and ease of dissemination but whether CDIs are efficacious and whether they produce benefits equivalent to face-to-face interventions (FTFIs) remain unclear. Therefore, we identified controlled trials of both CDIs and FTFIs and used meta-analysis (a) to determine the relative efficacy of these two approaches and (b) to test predictors of intervention efficacy. We included studies examining FTFIs (N=5237; 56% female; 87% White) and CDIs (N=32,243; 51% female; 81% White). Independent raters coded participant characteristics, design and methodological features, intervention content, and calculated weighted mean effect sizes using fixed and random-effects models. Analyses indicated that, compared to controls, FTFI participants drank less, drank less frequently, and reported fewer problems at short-term follow-up (d(+)s=0.15-0.19); they continued to consume lower quantities at intermediate (d(+)=0.23) and long-term (d(+)=0.14) follow-ups. Compared to controls, CDI participants reported lower quantities, frequency, and peak intoxication at short-term follow-up (d(+)s=0.13-0.29), but these effects were not maintained. Direct comparisons between FTFI and CDIs were infrequent, but these trials favored the FTFIs on both quantity and problem measures (d(+)s=0.12-0.20). Moderator analyses identified participant and intervention characteristics that influence intervention efficacy. Overall, we conclude that FTFIs provide the most effective and enduring effects.

Indexed as

Professional-Patient RelationsAdolescentAdultAlcoholismAlcohol-Related DisordersCognitive Behavioral TherapyControlled Clinical Trials as TopicFemaleHumansMaleMotivational InterviewingStudentsTherapy, Computer-AssistedTreatment OutcomeYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID23022767
PMCPMC3511828

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.