Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30684431›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2017

Videoconferencing-Based Treatment of Alcohol Use Disorders: Analyses of Nonparticipation.

Kristine Tarp, Anna Mejldal, Anette Søgaard Nielsen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 42% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kristine TarpUnit of Clinical Alcohol Research, Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense C, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0901-855X
Anna MejldalUnit of Clinical Alcohol Research, Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense C, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4612-4338
Anette Søgaard NielsenUnit of Clinical Alcohol Research, Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense C, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8569-4165
University of Southern Denmark · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe recently conducted a small randomized controlled trial (RCT) aiming to examine the effectiveness of videoconferencing-based treatment of alcohol use disorders in a real-life setting. The patient and participation rates were lower than anticipated.

objectiveThe objectives of our study were (1) to examine differences between participants and nonparticipants, and (2) to examine the characteristics of nonparticipants and their reported reasons for not participating.

methodsFirst, we analyzed nonparticipation through a comparative analysis of participants and nonparticipants using data from a clinical database, covering all patients starting treatment at the clinic. Second, on the basis of data from an anonymous questionnaire filled out by nonparticipants, we analyzed barriers to participating and the descriptive sociodemographics of nonparticipants who reported technical barriers versus those who did not.

resultsOf 128 consecutive patients starting treatment during the study period, we found no significant differences between participants (n=71) and nonparticipants (n=51) according to sociodemographics, alcohol measures, and composite scores. Of 51 nonparticipants, 43 filled out the questionnaire with reasons for not participating. We derived 2 categories of barriers from the questionnaire: scientific barriers, which were barriers to the scientific study in general (n=6), and technical barriers, which were barriers to using a laptop or videoconferencing specifically (n=27). We found no significant differences in sociodemographics between nonparticipants who reported technical barriers to participating in the study and those who did not note technical barriers. A total of 13 patients elaborated on technical barriers, and 9 patients found videoconferencing impersonal, preferred personal contact, and would rather attend face-to-face treatment at the clinic.

conclusionsPatient barriers to participating in the RCT were mainly concerned with the technology. There were no significant differences between participants and nonparticipants, nor between nonparticipants who noted technical barriers to participating and those who did not. If a similar study is to be conducted or the solution is to be upscaled and implemented, attention should be given to the user friendliness of the technical equipment and the recruitment process, preparing the patients by emphasizing the information given to them about the technical equipment and its advantages.

Indexed as

alcoholismbarrierseffectivenessnonparticipationrefusal to participatetreatment of alcohol use disorderstreatment outcometreatment refusalvideoconferencing

Identifiers

PMID30684431
PMCPMC6748025
OpenAlexW2764105642

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.