ArticleInternet interventions2020
A randomized trial of brief web-based prevention of unhealthy alcohol use: Participant self-selection compared to a male young adult source population.
Article in Internet interventions, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHow much a randomized controlled trial (RCT) sample is representative of or differs from its source population is a challenging question, with major implications for generalizability of results. It is particularly crucial for freely-available web-based interventions tested in RCTs since they are designed to reach broad populations and could increase health disparities if they fail to reach the more vulnerable individuals. We assessed the representativeness of a sample of participants in a primary/secondary prevention web-based brief intervention RCT in relation to its source population. Then we compared those recruited to those not recruited in the RCT.
methodsThere is a mandatory army recruitment process in Switzerland at age 19 for men. Between August 2010 and July 2011, 12,564 men (source population) attended two recruitment centers and were asked to answer a screening questionnaire on alcohol use. Among 11,819 (94.1%) who completed it, 7027 (59.5%) agreed to participate in a longitudinal cohort study with regular assessments. In 2012, these participants were invited to a web-based brief intervention RCT. Participation was not dependent on the presence or quantity of alcohol use. We assessed the representativeness of the RCT sample in relation to the source population and compared participants recruited/not recruited in the RCT with respect to education level and alcohol use.
resultsThe RCT sample differed from the source population: individuals 20 and over were significantly less represented (34.3% vs 37.9%,
conclusionsRCT participants differed from other members of the source population, with those participating in the RCT having higher prevalence of any alcohol use but lower levels of consumption and lower prevalence of indicators of unhealthy alcohol use. Individuals with higher education were overrepresented in the RCT sample. Selection bias may exist at both ends of the drinking spectrum and individuals with some indicators of greater vulnerability were less likely to participate. Results of web-based studies may not adequately generalize to the general population.Trial registration: The trial was registered at current controlled trials: ISRCTN55991918.
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.