Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31691413›Full record

Trial reportAddiction (Abingdon, England)2020

High- versus low-intensity internet interventions for alcohol use disorders: results of a three-armed randomized controlled superiority trial.

Christopher Sundström, Niels Eék, Martin Kraepelien, Claudia Fahlke, Mikael Gajecki, Miriam Jakobson, Maria Beckman, Viktor Kaldo, Anne H Berman

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialEquivalence Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Addiction (Abingdon, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Christopher SundströmDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Centre for Psychiatry Research, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-4237-7159
Niels EékDepartment of Psychology, Gothenburg University, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Martin KraepelienDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Centre for Psychiatry Research, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Claudia FahlkeDepartment of Psychology, Gothenburg University, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Mikael GajeckiDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Centre for Psychiatry Research, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Miriam JakobsonStockholm County Council, Stockholm Health Care Services, Stockholm, Sweden.
Maria BeckmanDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Centre for Psychiatry Research, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Viktor KaldoDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Centre for Psychiatry Research, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Anne H BermanDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Centre for Psychiatry Research, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-7709-0230
Stockholm County Council · SEUniversity of Gothenburg · SELinnaeus University · SEUniversity of Regina · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo test the efficacy of a therapist-guided high-intensity internet intervention compared with an unguided low-intensity internet intervention among individuals with alcohol use disorder.

designA three-group randomized controlled trial with follow-up assessments post-treatment (12 weeks) and 6 months post-randomization (primary end-point). SETTINGS: General population sample in Sweden.

participantsA total of 166 on-line self-referred adults (49% males) with a score of 14 (females)/16 (males) or more on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test, a preceding week alcohol consumption of 11 (females)/14 (males) or more standard drinks and an alcohol use disorder according to a diagnostic interview. INTERVENTIONS AND COMPARATORS: Both the high- (n = 72) and low-intensity internet interventions (n = 71) consisted of modules based on relapse prevention. Controls were on a waiting-list (n = 23), and were only followed until the post-treatment follow-up. Participants were randomized at a 7 : 7 : 2 ratio. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome was self-reported alcohol consumption in the preceding week measured as (1) number of standard drinks and (2) number of heavy drinking days at the 6-month follow-up.

findingsAlcohol use disorders were largely in the severe category (74.7%), with the majority of participants having had alcohol problems for more than 5 years. Attrition was 13 and 22% at the post-treatment and 6-month follow-up, respectively. At the 6-month follow-up, an intent-to-treat analysis showed no significant differences in alcohol consumption between the high- and low-intensity interventions [standard drinks d = -0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) = -0.50 to 0.16; heavy drinking days: d = -0.07, 95% CI = -0.40 to 0.26]. Prevalence of negative effects was somewhat low (8-14%) in both intervention groups, as was deterioration (3-5%).

conclusionsAt 6-month follow-up, there were no significant differences between a therapist-guided high-intensity internet intervention and an unguided low-intensity internet intervention in reducing alcohol consumption among individuals with an alcohol use disorder.

Indexed as

AdultAlcohol DrinkingAlcoholismCognitive Behavioral TherapyFemaleHumansInternet-Based InterventionMaleMiddle AgedSelf ReportSwedenAlcoholalcohol use disordercognitive behavior therapyinternet interventionrandomized controlled trialtreatment; cognitive behavior therapy

Identifiers

PMID31691413
PMCPMC7187301
OpenAlexW2986679346

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.