ArticleAddictive behaviors reports2020
"Have a little less, feel a lot better": Mixed-method evaluation of an alcohol intervention.
Article in Addictive behaviors reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Understanding How and Why Alcohol Interventions Prevent and Reduce Problematic Alcohol Consumption among Older Adults: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Pooled it
- Barriers to alcohol intervention program: a scoping review.Korean journal of family medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the mixed-methods study reported here was to evaluate the impact of a "gain-framed", multimedia campaign to encourage heavier drinking men aged 45-64 years to drink less. Quantitative analyses were based on pre-intervention panel surveys of 3057 men in intervention regions and 500 in the control region, and post-intervention panel surveys of 1508 men in intervention regions and 219 in the control region. Qualitative analyses entailed thematic analysis of interviews with 14 men: five who had reduced their drinking after seeing the campaign, four who had considered reducing but did not, and five who did not consider changing. Interviews focused on men's responses to the campaign, and their ideas for how to improve it. In quantitative analyses, the campaign was associated with significant changes in alcohol consumption, and significant increases in readiness to change and likelihood of using moderate drinking strategies. In qualitative analyses, men appreciated the friendly, non-threatening tone and that the message was straightforward, meaningful, achievable, and was gain-framed - i.e., emphasised the benefits of drinking less rather than the harms of drinking too much. However, the men who did not change their behaviour also identified several barriers to responding in ways encouraged by the message. It would be important to address their views of their drinking as not problematic, as pleasurable, and as socially expected, and also their sense of not feeling empowered to initiate or maintain behaviour 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.