Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26334629›Full record

Trial reportAddiction science & clinical practice2015

A pilot study comparing in-person and web-based motivational interviewing among adults with a first-time DUI offense.

Karen Chan Osilla, Susan M Paddock, Thomas J Leininger, Elizabeth J D'Amico, Brett A Ewing, Katherine E Watkins

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Addiction science & clinical practice, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. CRIMINAL DETERRENCE: EVIDENCE FROM AN INDIVIDUAL-LEVEL ANALYSIS OF 24/7 SOBRIETY.Journal of policy analysis and management : [the journal of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management] · 2020
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Karen Chan OsillaRAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90407-2138, USA. karenc@rand.org.
Susan M PaddockRAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90407-2138, USA. paddock@rand.org.
Thomas J LeiningerDepartment of Statistical Science, Duke University, Box 90251, Durham, NC, 27708-0251, USA. tjleininger@gmail.com.
Elizabeth J D'AmicoRAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90407-2138, USA. damico@rand.org.
Brett A EwingRAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90407-2138, USA. bewing@rand.org.
Katherine E WatkinsRAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90407-2138, USA. kwatkins@rand.org.
RAND Corporation · USDuke University · US

Funding

Hierarchical Modeling of Alcohol Treatment Outcomes of Group TherapyR01AA019663 · NIAAA · RAND CORPORATION · PI HAN, BING · 2010 to 2018
$1.6M
Using Technology To Deliver Brief Interventions in DUI ProgramsRC1AA019034 · NIAAA · RAND CORPORATION · PI WATKINS, KATHERINE E · 2009 to 2010
$999k
NIAAA NIH HHS R01 AA019663NIAAA NIH HHS R01AA019663NIAAA NIH HHS RC1 AA019034NIAAA NIH HHS RC1AA019034
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDriving under the influence (DUI) is a significant problem, and there is a pressing need to develop interventions that reduce future risk.

methodsWe pilot-tested the acceptance and efficacy of web-motivational interviewing (MI) and in-person MI interventions among a diverse sample of individuals with a first-time DUI offense. Participants (N = 159) were 65 percent male, 40 percent Hispanic, and an average age of 30 (SD = 9.8). They were enrolled at one of three participating 3-month DUI programs in Los Angeles County and randomized to usual care (UC)-only (36-h program), in-person MI plus UC, or a web-based intervention using MI (web-MI) plus UC. Participants were assessed at intake and program completion. We examined intervention acceptance and preliminary efficacy of the interventions on alcohol consumption, DUI, and alcohol-related consequences.

resultsWeb-MI and in-person MI participants rated the quality of and satisfaction with their sessions significantly higher than participants in the UC-only condition. However, there were no significant group differences between the MI conditions and the UC-only condition in alcohol consumption, DUI, and alcohol-related consequences. Further, 67 percent of our sample met criteria for alcohol dependence, and the majority of participants in all three study conditions continued to report alcohol-related consequences at follow-up.

conclusionsParticipants receiving MI plus UC and UC-only had similar improvements, and a large proportion had symptoms of alcohol dependence. Receiving a DUI and having to deal with the numerous consequences related to this type of event may be significant enough to reduce short-term behaviors, but future research should explore whether more intensive interventions are needed to sustain long-term changes.

Indexed as

InternetAdultAlcohol DrinkingAlcoholismConsumer BehaviorDriving Under the InfluenceFemaleHumansLos AngelesMaleMotivational InterviewingPilot ProjectsSocioeconomic Factors

Identifiers

PMID26334629
PMCPMC4636762
OpenAlexW1758908123

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.