ArticleAlkoholizm i narkomania2015
Does Brief Intervention Work For Heavy Episodic Drinking? A Comparison of Emergency Department Patients in Two Cultures.
Article in Alkoholizm i narkomania, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Psychosocial and pharmacologic interventions to reduce harmful alcohol use in low- and middle-income countries.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Translation and adaptation of the Brief Intervention Adherence Scale for the Tanzanian culture.Global mental health (Cambridge, England) · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Little has been reported on the efficacy of brief intervention (BI) among heavy episodic drinkers, although this drinking style is known to be especially harmful in relation to negative consequences including alcohol-related injuries. The comparative efficacy of BI is analyzed in two similar randomized controlled clinical trials of emergency department (ED) patients in two different cultures, both of which exhibit similar drinking styles of heavy episodic drinking: Poland and Mexican-Americans in the U.S. Improvements in drinking and problem outcomes are analyzed at 3-month and 12-month follow-up, using random effects modeling, among 446 Polish patients and 698 Mexican-American patients, randomized to screened only, assessment, and intervention conditions in each study. In Poland significant improvement was observed in all outcome measures for the assessed condition at 3-months compared to baseline, but only in the two problem variables at 12-months, while for the intervention condition, significant improvement was found in all outcome measures at both time periods; however, estimates of the interaction terms were not statistically significant. In the Mexica-American study, while significant improvement in nearly all outcome measures were observed at 3 months and 12 months for both conditions, estimates of the interaction terms suggest that for all drinking variables, but not problem variables, outcomes were significantly improved for the intervention condition over the assessed condition at 12 months, suggesting a 12-month intervention effect. Findings here are non-conclusive regarding a treatment effect of BI for heavy episodic drinking in ED patients. Given the mixed findings for BI in other ED studies, future studies need to explore the efficacy of BI in other populations and cultures exhibiting different drinking patterns to help identify what type of drinker would most benefit from BI in the ED setting.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.