Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36484591›Full record

SynthesisJournal of studies on alcohol and drugs2022

Treatment-As-Usual Control Groups in Brief Alcohol Intervention Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Jacob L Scharer, Jennifer S Funderburk, Martin J De Vita, Yvette Rother, Stephen A Maisto

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jacob L ScharerVeterans Affairs (VA) Center for Integrated Healthcare, Syracuse VA Medical Center, Syracuse, New York.
Jennifer S FunderburkVeterans Affairs (VA) Center for Integrated Healthcare, Syracuse VA Medical Center, Syracuse, New York.
Martin J De VitaVeterans Affairs (VA) Center for Integrated Healthcare, Syracuse VA Medical Center, Syracuse, New York.
Yvette RotherVeterans Affairs (VA) Center for Integrated Healthcare, Syracuse VA Medical Center, Syracuse, New York.
Stephen A MaistoVeterans Affairs (VA) Center for Integrated Healthcare, Syracuse VA Medical Center, Syracuse, New York.
SUNY Upstate Medical University · USSyracuse VA Medical Center · USSyracuse University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveBrief alcohol interventions (BAIs) are evidence-based practices that can help reduce hazardous drinking among patients in medical settings. However, descriptions of the treatment-as-usual (TAU) control groups that BAIs are compared to in clinical trials often lack clarity and detail. This systematic review and meta-analysis quantified and compared descriptions of intervention and TAU control arms within reports of randomized controlled trials and examined whether treatment effects were affected by level of detail in narrative descriptions.

methodA systematic literature search to identify eligible articles was performed. Studies were rated on methodological quality, and the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist was used to rate the level of clarity and detail included in descriptions of the intervention and TAU conditions in eligible articles. Data were extracted from articles for use in meta-analysis and meta-regression.

resultsTwenty-one studies met inclusion criteria. Across the studies, TIDieR ratings for intervention arms were higher than ratings for control arms. BAIs were linked to reductions in drinks per week, heavy drinking episodes, and alcohol consequences over time when compared with TAU. TIDieR ratings for control groups were significantly associated with larger treatment effects on drinks per week and alcohol consequences but were not significant for heavy drinking episodes.

conclusionsThis meta-analysis reiterated the effectiveness of BAIs in medical settings. Yet the lack of clarity in TAU descriptions raises concerns regarding the validity of BAI trials, suggesting need for more detailed reporting and use of the TIDieR guidelines for support.

Indexed as

EthanolResearch DesignControl GroupsHumansEthanol

Identifiers

PMID36484591
PMCPMC9756399
OpenAlexW4293005053

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.