ArticleAddiction science & clinical practice2017
Delivery of screening and brief intervention for unhealthy alcohol use in an urban academic Federally Qualified Health Center.
Article in Addiction science & clinical practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- No improvement in AUDIT-C screening and brief intervention rates among wait-list controls following support of Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services: evidence from a cluster randomised trial.BMC health services research · 2024Trial
- Computerized Clinical Decision Support System for Prompting Brief Alcohol Interventions with Treatment Seeking Smokers: A Sex-Based Secondary Analysis of a Cluster Randomized Trial.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Trial
- Sociodemographic and Clinical Correlates of Missed Opportunities for Evidence-Based Alcohol Counseling Among Adults Who Report Binge Drinking.American journal of preventive medicine · 2026Article
- A Narrative Review of Alcohol Prevention Interventions Among Older Adults.Alcohol research : current reviews · 2025Review
- Screening for Unhealthy Alcohol Use Among Patients With Multiple Chronic Conditions in Primary Care.AJPM focus · 2024Article
- Promoting nurse-led behaviour change interventions to prevent cardiovascular disease in disadvantaged communities: A scoping review.Health & social care in the community · 2022Article
- Alcohol brief intervention, specialty treatment and drinking outcomes at 12 months: Results from a systematic alcohol screening and brief intervention initiative in adult primary care.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2022Article
- Digital Health Interventions to Enhance Prevention in Primary Care: Scoping Review.JMIR medical informatics · 2022Article
- Patient and provider factors associated with receipt and delivery of brief interventions for unhealthy alcohol use in primary care.Alcoholism, clinical and experimental research · 2021Article
- A Behind-the-Scenes Look at Practice Facilitation to Improve Delivery of Unhealthy Alcohol Use Screening and Management Services in Primary Care: A Qualitative Study.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundScreening and brief intervention (SBI) for unhealthy drinking has not been widely implemented in primary care partly due to reliance on physicians to perform it.
methodsWe implemented a model of nursing staff-delivered SBI for unhealthy drinking for adult patients receiving primary care at an academically-affiliated Federally Qualified Health Center in the Bronx, NY. Our model consisted of nursing staff screening all patients with the alcohol use disorders identification test consumption questions (AUDIT-C) and, if screening positive, providing BI or referral to specialty services. We developed a clinical decision support tool integrated into the electronic health record to guide nursing staff and record SBI provision. To evaluate this model, we determined overall SBI delivery to patients and factors associated with receiving SBI.
resultsBetween October 2013 and September 2014, 9119 unique adult patients made 24,285 visits. Patients were majority women (67.5%) and Hispanic/Latino (54.5%). Overall, 46.2% were screened, with 19.0-35.8% of eligible patients screened in each month. Increasing age (OR: 0.82 [95% CI 0.80-0.85] for a 10-year increase), female sex (OR: 0.83 [95% CI 0.77-0.91]), and chronic conditions like hypertension (OR: 0.62 [95% CI 0.56-0.70]) and diabetes (OR: 0.66 [95% CI 0.58-0.75]), among others, were associated with a lower odds of being screened. Of all patients screened, 225 (5.3%) screened positive and of those patients, 122 (54.2%) received a BI. Patients with higher AUDIT-C scores were more likely to receive a BI (OR: 1.24 [95% CI 1.04-1.47] for a 1-point increase) and non-English speaking patients were less likely to receive a BI than those who spoke English (OR: 0.42 [95% CI 0.18-0.97]).
conclusionsOur model of SBI resulted in screening of nearly half of all eligible patients and BI provision to over half of those screening positive. Future efforts to improve SBI delivery should focus on groups such as older adults, women, and those with chronic medical conditions.
Indexed as
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.