Stephanie Colbert1, Louise Thornton2, Robyn Richmond3. 1. School Public Health and Community Medicine, University of New South Wales, Kensington, Australia. 2. The Matilda Centre for Research in Mental Health and Substance Use, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. 3. School Public Health and Community Medicine, University of New South Wales, Kensington, Australia. r.richmond@unsw.edu.au.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Smartphone applications (apps) designed to assist users to reduce hazardous and harmful alcohol consumption show potential as an inexpensive alternative to traditional brief intervention in primary care. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of the literature on alcohol reduction apps and the availability of evidenced-based apps on top commercial app stores. METHODS: We reviewed literature through to December 2019 using the databases PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Google Scholar and keyword search terms smartphone/mobile/phone AND application/app AND alcohol. Articles were included if the primary intervention was a smartphone app and the study measured participant changes in frequency or volume of alcohol consumption. RESULTS: 21 relevant articles were identified that evaluated 19 unique smartphone apps. Of the 19 unique apps, seven were designed for use among youth and 12 in adult populations. The available evidence for the efficacy of alcohol reduction apps among youth is inconclusive, with results from these evaluations not showing a clear benefit in reducing alcohol consumption compared to control groups. The results of apps designed for adult populations appears more promising, but results are still mixed. Of the 19 alcohol reduction apps that have been evaluated only eight of these are currently publicly available in commercial app stores. Of these eight apps, only four were demonstrated in the literature to assist with reducing alcohol consumption. CONCLUSION: The evidence for alcohol reduction apps is promising but inconclusive. Few apps that have been evaluated in the scientific literature are currently available for download in commercial app stores.
BACKGROUND: Smartphone applications (apps) designed to assist users to reduce hazardous and harmful alcohol consumption show potential as an inexpensive alternative to traditional brief intervention in primary care. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of the literature on alcohol reduction apps and the availability of evidenced-based apps on top commercial app stores. METHODS: We reviewed literature through to December 2019 using the databases PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Google Scholar and keyword search terms smartphone/mobile/phone AND application/app AND alcohol. Articles were included if the primary intervention was a smartphone app and the study measured participant changes in frequency or volume of alcohol consumption. RESULTS: 21 relevant articles were identified that evaluated 19 unique smartphone apps. Of the 19 unique apps, seven were designed for use among youth and 12 in adult populations. The available evidence for the efficacy of alcohol reduction apps among youth is inconclusive, with results from these evaluations not showing a clear benefit in reducing alcohol consumption compared to control groups. The results of apps designed for adult populations appears more promising, but results are still mixed. Of the 19 alcohol reduction apps that have been evaluated only eight of these are currently publicly available in commercial app stores. Of these eight apps, only four were demonstrated in the literature to assist with reducing alcohol consumption. CONCLUSION: The evidence for alcohol reduction apps is promising but inconclusive. Few apps that have been evaluated in the scientific literature are currently available for download in commercial app stores.
Entities:
Keywords:
Alcohol; Application; Apps; Drinking; Mobile phone; Smartphone
Authors: Scott T Walters; Eun-Young Mun; Zhengqi Tan; Justin M Luningham; Emily T Hébert; Jason A Oliver; Michael S Businelle Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2022-08-07 Impact factor: 3.928
Authors: Derek D Satre; Meredith C Meacham; Lauren D Asarnow; Weston S Fisher; Lisa R Fortuna; Esti Iturralde Journal: Am J Health Promot Date: 2021-10-15
Authors: Claire Garnett; Olga Perski; Emma Beard; Susan Michie; Robert West; Jamie Brown Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2021-01-06 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Victoria Manning; Hugh Piercy; Joshua Benjamin Bernard Garfield; Stuart Gregory Clark; Mah Noor Andrabi; Dan Ian Lubman Journal: JMIR Mhealth Uhealth Date: 2021-12-10 Impact factor: 4.773
Authors: Sebastian Saur; Kiona K Weisel; Catharina Lang; Lukas M Fuhrmann; Sabine Steins-Loeber; Niklas Enewoldsen; Daniela Reichl; Mathias Zink; Fabian Jakobi; Melanie Rudolph; Andreas Ahnert; Wolf-Dietrich Braunwarth; Peter Falkai; Gabriele Koller; Nina Behle; Laura Hager; Thomas Hillemacher; Peter Heepe; Felix-Nicolai Müller; Thomas Kraus; Yaroslav Kiderman; Nicola Horn; Johannes Kornhuber; Stephan Lins; Philipp Spitzer; Dominikus Bönsch; Cyril Counot; Mark Stemmler; Anja Hildebrand; Volker Amelung; Linda Kerkemeyer; Matthias Berking Journal: Internet Interv Date: 2022-02-23
Authors: Tristan J Philippe; Naureen Sikder; Anna Jackson; Maya E Koblanski; Eric Liow; Andreas Pilarinos; Krisztina Vasarhelyi Journal: JMIR Ment Health Date: 2022-05-12
Authors: Daniel Leightley; Charlotte Williamson; Laura Goodwin; Dominic Murphy; Roberto J Rona; Ewan Carr; James Shearer; Jordan P Davis; Amos Simms; Nicola T Fear Journal: JMIR Mhealth Uhealth Date: 2022-06-20 Impact factor: 4.947