SynthesisBritish medical bulletin2025
The effectiveness of digital training on screening, brief interventions, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) for medical and health professionals: a systematic review.
Synthesis in British medical bulletin, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Centering Patient Voices: Implementing Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment to Address Risky Substance Use in Family Planning Clinics.Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe effectiveness of digital SBIRT training for improving knowledge/competence and confidence for health promotion, behavioural and/or health outcomes is not established. We aimed to conduct a systematic review examining the effectiveness of digital training for medical and health professionals on screening, brief interventions, and referral to treatment (SBIRT), on knowledge of the health condition/behaviours, their treatments, and onwards referral to services, and/or changes in attitude, skills, or confidence to promote health. SOURCE OF DATA: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Epistemonikos, Google Scholar, and SCOPUS. Forty-two articles with 8985 participants, published between January 2001 and April 2024, were included. There were eight randomized controlled trials. Only one study was conducted in the UK. AREAS OF AGREEMENT: Digital SBIRT training may increase knowledge/competence, confidence, and self-efficacy for SBIRT delivery.Focus is primarily alcohol, tobacco, and substance use. Delivery is mostly web-based programmes, digital patient simulation, or blended learning with a face-to-face component. AREAS OF CONTROVERSY: Comparison between studies is hampered by heterogeneity in study design, target populations, intervention design and content, comparator/control groups, and outcomes assessed. GROWING POINTS: Majority of studies were cohort educational web-based learning. Studies were mostly low quality (13/42 with low risk of bias). Outcomes were diverse and often poorly reported. AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH: More high-quality research is needed, including assessment of practice, behavioural, and health outcomes. A standardized approach to assuring quality of delivery and testing is required. There is scope to develop, evaluate, and implement SBIRT interventions in a broader range of health promotion areas.
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.