Gillian W Shorter1,2, Jeremy W Bray3, Emma L Giles2, Amy J O'Donnell4, Anne H Berman5,6, Aisha Holloway7, Nick Heather8, Carolina Barbosa9, Kelly J Stockdale10, Stephanie J Scott11, Mike Clarke12, Dorothy Newbury-Birch11. 1. Institute of Mental Health Sciences, School of Psychology, Ulster University, Coleraine, Northern Ireland. 2. School of Health and Social Care, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, England. 3. Department of Economics, Bryan School of Business and Economics, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Greensboro, North Carolina. 4. Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, England. 5. Stockholm Health Care Services, Stockholm County Council, Stockholm, Sweden. 6. Centre for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 7. Nursing Studies, School of Health in Social Science, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland. 8. Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, England. 9. Behavioral Health Economics Program, RTI International, Chicago, Illinois. 10. School of Psychological and Social Sciences, York St. John University, York, England. 11. School of Social Sciences, Humanities and Law, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, England. 12. Northern Ireland Methodology Hub, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, Northern Ireland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to characterize recent alcohol brief intervention (ABI) efficacy and effectiveness trials, summarize outcomes, and show how variability in outcomes and reporting compromises the evidence base. METHOD: A systematic review and narrative synthesis of articles from 10 databases were undertaken (January 2000-November 2017); study selection represented recent, readily available publications. The National Institute of Care Excellence (NICE) Public Health Guideline 24 (Alcohol use disorders: prevention) informed ABI definitions. The review was conducted using Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) guidance and pre-registered on PROSPERO (CRD42016047185). Seven a priori specified domains were used to classify outcomes: biomarkers, alcohol-related outcomes, economic factors/resource use, health measures, life impact, intervention factors, and psychological/behavioral factors. RESULTS: The search identified 405 trials from 401 eligible papers. In 405 trials, 2,641 separate outcomes were measured in approximately 1,560 different ways. The most common outcomes used were the number of drinks consumed in a week and frequency of heavy episodic drinking. Biomarkers were least frequently used. The most common primary outcome was weekly drinks. By trial type, the most frequent outcome in efficacy and effectiveness trials was frequency of heavy drinking. CONCLUSIONS: Consumption outcomes predominated; however, no single outcome was found in all trials. This comprehensive outcome map and methodological detail on ABI effectiveness and efficacy trials can aid decision making in future trials. There was a diversity of instruments, time points, and outcome descriptions in methods and results sections. Compliance with reporting guidance would support data synthesis and improve trial quality. This review establishes the need for a core outcome set (COS)/minimum data standard and supports the Outcome Reporting in Brief Interventions: Alcohol initiative (ORBITAL) to improve standards in the ABI field through a COS for effectiveness and efficacy randomized trials.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to characterize recent alcohol brief intervention (ABI) efficacy and effectiveness trials, summarize outcomes, and show how variability in outcomes and reporting compromises the evidence base. METHOD: A systematic review and narrative synthesis of articles from 10 databases were undertaken (January 2000-November 2017); study selection represented recent, readily available publications. The National Institute of Care Excellence (NICE) Public Health Guideline 24 (Alcohol use disorders: prevention) informed ABI definitions. The review was conducted using Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) guidance and pre-registered on PROSPERO (CRD42016047185). Seven a priori specified domains were used to classify outcomes: biomarkers, alcohol-related outcomes, economic factors/resource use, health measures, life impact, intervention factors, and psychological/behavioral factors. RESULTS: The search identified 405 trials from 401 eligible papers. In 405 trials, 2,641 separate outcomes were measured in approximately 1,560 different ways. The most common outcomes used were the number of drinks consumed in a week and frequency of heavy episodic drinking. Biomarkers were least frequently used. The most common primary outcome was weekly drinks. By trial type, the most frequent outcome in efficacy and effectiveness trials was frequency of heavy drinking. CONCLUSIONS: Consumption outcomes predominated; however, no single outcome was found in all trials. This comprehensive outcome map and methodological detail on ABI effectiveness and efficacy trials can aid decision making in future trials. There was a diversity of instruments, time points, and outcome descriptions in methods and results sections. Compliance with reporting guidance would support data synthesis and improve trial quality. This review establishes the need for a core outcome set (COS)/minimum data standard and supports the Outcome Reporting in Brief Interventions: Alcohol initiative (ORBITAL) to improve standards in the ABI field through a COS for effectiveness and efficacy randomized trials.
Authors: Tracy Epton; Daniela Ghio; Lisa M Ballard; Sarah F Allen; Angelos P Kassianos; Rachael Hewitt; Katherine Swainston; Wendy Irene Fynn; Vickie Rowland; Juliette Westbrook; Elizabeth Jenkinson; Alison Morrow; Grant J McGeechan; Sabina Stanescu; Aysha A Yousuf; Nisha Sharma; Suhana Begum; Eleni Karasouli; Daniel Scanlan; Gillian W Shorter; Madelynne A Arden; Christopher J Armitage; Daryl B O'Connor; Atiya Kamal; Emily McBride; Vivien Swanson; Jo Hart; Lucie Byrne-Davis; Angel Chater; John Drury Journal: Soc Sci Med Date: 2022-03-26 Impact factor: 5.379
Authors: Gillian W Shorter; Jeremy W Bray; Nick Heather; Anne H Berman; Emma L Giles; Mike Clarke; Carolina Barbosa; Amy J O'Donnell; Aisha Holloway; Heleen Riper; Jean-Bernard Daeppen; Maristela G Monteiro; Richard Saitz; Jennifer McNeely; Lela McKnight-Eily; Alex Cowell; Paul Toner; Dorothy Newbury-Birch Journal: J Stud Alcohol Drugs Date: 2021-09 Impact factor: 3.346
Authors: Katarina Åsberg; Jenny Blomqvist; Oskar Lundgren; Hanna Henriksson; Pontus Henriksson; Preben Bendtsen; Marie Löf; Marcus Bendtsen Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-07-26 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Marcus Bendtsen; Anna Seiterö; Preben Bendtsen; Hanna Henriksson; Pontus Henriksson; Kristin Thomas; Marie Löf; Ulrika Müssener Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2021-07-16 Impact factor: 3.295