Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35972741›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2022

Association of Screening and Brief Intervention With Substance Use in Massachusetts Middle and High Schools.

Sharon Levy, Lauren E Wisk, Machiko Minegishi, Benjamin Ertman, Julie Lunstead, Melissa Brogna, Elissa R Weitzman

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Sharon LevyAdolescent Substance Use and Addiction Program, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Lauren E WiskDivision of General Internal Medicine and Health Services Research, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles.
Machiko MinegishiDivision of Adolescent and Young Adult Medicine, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Benjamin ErtmanAdolescent Substance Use and Addiction Program, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Julie LunsteadAdolescent Substance Use and Addiction Program, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Melissa BrognaAdolescent Substance Use and Addiction Program, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Elissa R WeitzmanDepartment of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Boston Children's Hospital · USHarvard University · USUniversity of California, Los Angeles · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Screening and brief intervention (SBI) programs in schools have the potential to provide substance use prevention messages to large numbers of adolescents. This study evaluated the association between exposure to a school-based SBI program and reductions in substance use among youths after enactment of a law that required Massachusetts schools to provide SBI to all students. Objective: To estimate the association between exposure to a school-based SBI program and changes in substance use among youths. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this mixed-method quality improvement study using an effectiveness-implementation hybrid design, stakeholder interviews were conducted to describe the operations, timing, and impressions of SBI implementation at 14 intervention schools in Massachusetts. Repeated cross-sectional surveys of youths in intervention and comparison groups were administered between December 19, 2017, and May 22, 2019, to assess substance use and associated measures of perceived risk, knowledge, and adult support before and approximately 3 months after SBI implementation among exposed groups. A difference-in-differences framework was used to estimate substance use outcomes associated with SBI exposure among students in middle school (grades 7 and 8) and high school (grades 9 and 10) using adjusted overlap-weighted generalized models to account for covariate imbalance between exposed and unexposed school grades. In addition, 14 school staff members were interviewed about implementation. Exposures: Exposure vs nonexposure to a school-based SBI program. Main Outcomes and Measures: Frequency of alcohol, cannabis, and e-cigarette use (measured in days) and any binge drinking in the past 3 months. Results: Between December 2017 and May 2019, 8771 survey responses were collected from 4587 students in grades 7 through 10 who were attending one of 23 participating school districts. The median (IQR) age was 13 (13-14) years (range, 12-17 years); 2226 students self-identified as female (48.5%), 2206 (48.1%) as male, and 155 (3.4%) as transgender or preferred not to answer. Overall, 163 students (3.6%) identified their race as Asian, 146 (3.2%) as Black or African American, 2952 (64.4%) as White, and 910 (19.8%) as mixed or other race (including American Indian or Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander); 416 students (9.1%) preferred not to answer or were missing data on race. A total of 625 students (13.6%) identified their ethnicity as Hispanic and 3962 (86.4%) as non-Hispanic. Cannabis use increased over time in both the SBI group (middle school: marginal estimated probability, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.21-2.51] at baseline vs 2.01 [95% CI, 0.60-6.70] at follow-up; high school: marginal estimated probability, 2.86 [95% CI, 0.56-14.56] at baseline vs 3.10 [95% CI, 0.57-16.96] at follow-up) and the control group (middle school: marginal estimated probability, 0.24 [95% CI, 0.05-1.03] at baseline vs 3.38 [95% CI, 0.81-14.18] at follow-up; high school: marginal estimated probability, 1.30 [95% CI, 0.27-6.29] at baseline vs 1.72 [95% CI, 0.34-8.66] at follow-up). e-cigarette use also increased over time in both the SBI group (middle school: marginal estimated probability, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.22-3.01] at baseline vs 1.94 [95% CI, 0.53-7.02] at follow-up; high school: marginal estimated probability, 3.82 [95% CI, 0.72-20.42] at baseline vs 3.51 [95% CI, 0.55-22.59] at follow-up) and the control group (middle school: marginal estimated probability, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.12-2.30] at baseline vs 3.40 [95% CI, 0.72-16.08] at follow-up; high school: marginal estimated probability, 2.29 [95% CI, 0.41-12.65] at baseline vs 3.53 [95% CI, 0.62-20.16] at follow-up). Exposure to SBI was associated with a significantly smaller increase in the rate of cannabis use among middle school students (adjusted rate ratio [aRR], 0.19; 95% CI, 0.04-0.86) and significantly smaller increases in the rates of cannabis and e-cigarette use among all female students (cannabis use: aRR, 0.17 [95% CI, 0.03-0.96]; e-cigarette use: aRR, 0.16 [95% CI, 0.03-0.82]) compared with nonexposure. No other significant differences were observed among students in grades 7 and 8, and no differences were found in any comparison between groups in grades 9 and 10. Conclusions and Relevance: In this quality improvement study, exposure to a school-based SBI program was associated with a significantly smaller increase in the rate of cannabis use among middle school students and significantly smaller increases in the rates of cannabis and e-cigarette use among all female students. These findings suggest that implementation of SBI programs in schools may help to reduce substance use among middle school and female students, and further study of these programs is warranted.

Indexed as

CannabisElectronic Nicotine Delivery SystemsSubstance-Related DisordersAdolescentAdultChildCrisis InterventionCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleSchools

Identifiers

PMID35972741
PMCPMC9382442
OpenAlexW4292065842

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.