Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33710667›Full record

ArticleAlcoholism, clinical and experimental research2021

Changes in Alcohol Use and Drinking and Driving Outcomes From Before Arrest for Driving Under the Influence to After Interlock Removal.

Robert B Voas, Anthony Scott Tippetts, Eduardo Romano, Thomas H Nochajski, Amy R Manning, Eileen Taylor, Michael Scherer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Alcoholism, clinical and experimental research, 2021. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

7 authors.

Robert B VoasPacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, Calverton, Maryland, USA.
Anthony Scott TippettsPacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, Calverton, Maryland, USA.
Eduardo RomanoPacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, Calverton, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2367-2550
Thomas H NochajskiUniversity at Buffalo, The State University of New York, New York, New York, USA.
Amy R ManningPacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, Calverton, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7544-543X
Eileen TaylorPacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, Calverton, Maryland, USA.
Michael SchererPacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, Calverton, Maryland, USA.

Funding

Managing Heavy Drinking to Avoid Impaired Driving: A Study of Interlock UsersR01AA022312 · NIAAA · PACIFIC INSTITUTE FOR RES AND EVALUATION · PI NOCHAJSKI, THOMAS H, ROMANO, EDUARDO O · 2014 to 2018
$2.8M
NIAAA NIH HHS R01 AA022312
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHalf of the offenders convicted of impaired driving in the United States are sentenced to install alcohol ignition interlock devices (IIDs), which prevent them from starting their vehicles if they have been drinking. No research has yet explored offenders' patterns of alcohol consumption and driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) from the time before the arrest to the time period after the IID is installed. This study aims to fill that gap in knowledge.

methodsUsing the Timeline Follow-back interview procedure, we assessed the daily drinking of 153 convicted DUI offenders' self-reported total alcohol consumption and rates of self-reported driving after drinking over 4 phases: before DUI arrest, between arrest and IID installation, during the phase on the interlock, and after the interlock is removed. Because information about behaviors in each period was not available for every participant, comparisons were made using paired-sample contrasts.

resultsCompared with before the arrest, total alcohol use decreased by 50% in the 4-month phase following arrest and before IID installation, though it did not change much afterward. The frequency of drinking and driving decreased sharply after the arrest (-82%), with further decrease upon installation of the interlock (-58%, p = 0.05). The frequency of drinking and driving after the IID was removed returned to preinstallation drinking and driving status (+58%, p = 0.01).

conclusionsParticipants made significant adjustments to their drinking behavior by adhering to the traditional DUI driving restrictions in the postarrest phase. Although installation of an IID was not associated with a significant change in drinking, it further reduced the frequency of drinking and driving. Evaluations of the IID experience should take into account information on an individual's drinking and DUI behaviors not only before the IID was installed, but before the individual was arrested.

Indexed as

Law EnforcementAdultAlcohol DrinkingDriving Under the InfluenceFemaleHumansMaleAlcohol ConsumptionDrinking and DrivingIgnition InterlocksIIDsImpaired DrivingRecidivism

Identifiers

PMID33710667
PMCPMC8076067

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.