ArticleAlcohol, clinical & experimental research2024
Understanding effects of the group process on drinking outcomes for emerging adults experiencing homelessness.
Article in Alcohol, clinical & experimental research, 2024. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is little research on group process for motivational interviewing-based group interventions with young people. We examine how change talk, group climate and cohesion, and facilitator empathy among emerging adults experiencing homelessness affect their drinking outcomes.
methodsData come from a clinical trial at three drop-in centers serving emerging adults experiencing homelessness in Los Angeles County and focus on those who received the intervention (n = 132). Participants completed baseline, 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up surveys. They were predominantly male and non-white. Group sessions were digitally recorded and coded for percentage change talk (PCT), group climate and cohesion, and facilitator empathy.
resultsBecause baseline alcohol use was significantly higher at site 1 than sites 2 and 3, we examined associations separately by site. At 6 months, higher PCT was associated with fewer drinks per drinking day for sites 2 and 3, whereas higher PCT was associated with more drinks per drinking day for site 1. There were no effects of PCT at 12 months. Higher group cohesion scores were associated with fewer drinking days at 6 months; higher facilitator empathy was associated with fewer maximum drinks in a day at both 6 and 12 months. Group climate was not associated with drinking outcomes.
conclusionsThese findings highlight the importance of measuring multiple factors in the group process to understand outcomes. What is "uttered" during group and what is observed provide different methods to evaluate the group process and allow us to better bridge the gap between research and practice.
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.