Observational studyBehavior therapy2019
A Sequential Analysis of Clinician Skills and Client Change Statements in a Brief Motivational Intervention for Young Adult Heavy Drinking.
Observational study in Behavior therapy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring motivational interviewing's technical hypothesis with emerging adults from racial or ethnic minority groups with heavy alcohol use.Journal of ethnicity in substance abuse · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This study examined sequential relationships between clinician skills and client statements about behavior change in a randomized clinical trial comparing a brief motivational intervention (BMI) to a relaxation training control condition (REL) in a sample of heavy drinking young adults. Clinician and client interactions (N = 167) were assessed according to two established observational rating systems. Sequential analyses examined the transitional associations between clinicians' use of MI-eliciting skills (i.e., questions and reflections), MI-supportive skills (e.g., affirmations, emphasize client autonomy, statements of support), MI-inconsistent skills (e.g., confrontations, unsolicited advice), and subsequent client statements about behavior change (i.e., change talk or sustain talk). In both conditions, clinicians' use of MI-elicitation skills operated in a manner that was largely consistent (100% in BMI; 84% in REL) with the directional relationships proposed by MI theory (i.e., The Technical Hypothesis). More detailed analyses of the BMI condition showed clinician skills were related to statements about behavior change somewhat differently in drinking compared to coping discussions. While elicitations of change talk were associated with increased odds of their intended response (i.e., distal drinking and proximal coping change talk), elicitations of proximal coping sustain talk were associated with higher odds of proximal change talk. MI-supportive skills were also associated with increased odds of proximal change talk, and instances of proximal sustain talk were rare in the sample. This fine-grained analysis presents sequential transitions to client change and sustain talk with greater classification specificity than has been previously reported. Such efforts have the potential to advance our understanding of the function of MI skills in promoting client discussions about drinking (i.e., evoking) and coping (i.e., planning) behavior change.
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.