Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27062499›Full record

ReviewThe journal of primary prevention2016

Are We There Yet? A Review of Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) Implementation Fidelity Tools and Proficiency Checklists.

Kaitlyn Reho, Jon Agley, Mallori DeSalle, Ruth A Gassman

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in The journal of primary prevention, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Kaitlyn RehoIndiana Prevention Resource Center, School of Public Health, Indiana University, Bloomington, 501 N. Morton St., Suite 110, Bloomington, IN, 47404, USA.
Jon AgleyInstitute for Research on Addictive Behavior, Indiana Prevention Resource Center, School of Public Health, Indiana University, Bloomington, 501 N. Morton St., Suite 110, Bloomington, IN, 47404, USA. jagley@indiana.edu.
Mallori DeSalleIndiana Prevention Resource Center, School of Public Health, Indiana University, Bloomington, 501 N. Morton St., Suite 110, Bloomington, IN, 47404, USA.
Ruth A GassmanInstitute for Research on Addictive Behavior, Indiana Prevention Resource Center, School of Public Health, Indiana University, Bloomington, 501 N. Morton St., Suite 110, Bloomington, IN, 47404, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Screening and brief intervention (SBI) for alcohol is an evidence-based prevention practice designed to reduce frequency and severity of alcohol misuse. Many studies have validated the effectiveness of SBI for reducing levels of alcohol misuse, especially in primary medical care. Additional research continues to be conducted in terms of the effectiveness of including referral to treatment (SBIRT) and addressing illicit drug use and prescription drug abuse. Importantly, cross-comparison among SBIRT programs is difficult because evaluative processes vary widely between programs, which themselves often are substantively different. In this brief report, we utilized cross-comparison techniques to elucidate similarities and differences among SBIRT fidelity tools and proficiency checklists. In early 2014, researchers completed a systematic review of SBIRT fidelity tools and proficiency checklists published or made available from 2004 through April 2014; in total, eleven instruments were located and assessed. The analytic methodology consisted of creating a matrix with key SBIRT components identified from the literature prior to assessment. Three researchers populated the matrix with the identified fidelity tools and proficiency checklists before assessing each tool for the presence or absence of each component. The level of agreement between the researchers was checked for inter-rater reliability using free-marginal Kappa statistics. The results of the matrix analysis suggested heterogeneity among existing SBIRT fidelity tools and proficiency checklists. Importantly, it was not the case that this lack of concordance reflected poorly on any given fidelity tool. Rather, it emphasized the multi-partite and variable nature of SBIRT programs. It was not evident that a single standardized SBIRT fidelity tool or proficiency checklist could appropriately determine the level of fidelity to SBIRT for all programs. Suggestions for next steps in SBIRT fidelity research are provided based on the output of the comparison matrix.

Indexed as

ChecklistReferral and ConsultationHumansMass ScreeningReproducibility of ResultsSubstance-Related DisordersEvaluationFidelityPreventionReviewScreening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT)

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.