Advanced Search

Study Preview



Study Title and Description

Brief intervention for drug-abusing adolescents in a school setting.



Key Questions Addressed
1 Evidence map
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Primary Publication Information
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
TitleData
Title Brief intervention for drug-abusing adolescents in a school setting.
Author Winters KC., Leitten W.
Country Department of Psychiatry, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities Campus, Minneapolis, MN 55454, USA. winte001@umn.edu
Year 2007
Numbers Pubmed ID: 17563146

Secondary Publication Information
There are currently no secondary publications defined for this study.


Extraction Form: Evidence Map
Arms
Number Title Description Comments
1 MI_a brief intervention with adolescent (BI-A)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
2 MI_b brief intervention with adolescent + parent (BI-AP)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
3 TAU assessment only control
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Design Details
Question... Follow Up Answer Follow-up Answer
Should this citation be included? Yes Please discuss population (see note to Dale sent Oct 11)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Ages eligible (in years) 14
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
17
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Total sample size (in all arms) 78
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Age distribution of enrolled population (in years) 15.6
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nr
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Substance used Alcohol
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Cannabis
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Alcohol
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Cannabis
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Interventions studied? Behavioral
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
No active treatment
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Behavioral
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
No active treatment
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Outcome? Self report of use/abstinence and/or intensity
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Other ... Personal Consequences Scale (PCS)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Age variation of enrolled population (in years) nr
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Study type RCT
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Is any arm a brief intervention (or single session)? No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Income level of country(ies) of origin Upper income
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Upper income
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |




Results & Comparisons


Results Data
Outcome: alcohol use days      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure MI_a MI_b TAU


0 months

N Analyzed 26 26 26
Mean 6.3 6.2 6.1
SD 1.2 0.9 1.3


6 months

N Analyzed 26 26 26
Mean 4.5 3.8 5.7
SD 0.9 1.2 1.1
Outcome: nos use days      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure MI_a MI_b TAU


0 months

N Analyzed 26 26 26
Mean 15.7 15 13.9
SD 5.5 5.3 5.5


6 months

N Analyzed 26 26 26
Mean 11.9 9.6 13.4
SD 5.2 4.7 5.4
Outcome: heavy drinking days      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure MI_a MI_b TAU


0 months

N Analyzed 26 26 26
Mean 2.6 2.7 2.5
SD 1.1 1 1.3


6 months

N Analyzed 26 26 26
Mean 1.8 1.2 2.4
SD 1 0.9 1.4
Outcome: Risks      Population: nos
Time Point Measure MI_a MI_b TAU


0 months

N Analyzed 26 26 26
Mean 15.2 15.3 14.3
SD 1.4 1.6 2


6 months

N Analyzed 26 26 26
Mean 11.7 11.3 13.9
SD 1.6 1.2 2.1


Quality Dimensions
Dimension Value Notes Comments
Intention-to-treat-analysis: Bias due to incomplete reporting and analysis according to group allocation No Dropped 1/79 noncompleter
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Group similarity at baseline (selection bias): Selection bias due to dissimilarity at baseline for the most important prognostic indicators Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Co-interventions (performance bias): Performance bias because co-interventions were different across groups Yes None
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Compliance (performance bias): Performance bias due to inappropriate compliance with interventions across groups Yes 100%
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Timing of outcome assessments (detection bias): Detection bias because important outcomes were not measured at the same time across groups Yes Same
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Additional Bias: Bias due to problems not covered elsewhere in the table. If yes, describe them in the Notes. No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Random sequence generation (selection bias): Selection bias (biased allocation to interventions) due to inadequate generation of a randomized sequence Unclear
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Allocation concealment (selection bias): Selection bias (biased allocation to interventions) due to inadequate concealment of allocations prior to assignment Unclear
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Blinding of participants (performance bias): Performance bias due to knowledge of the allocated interventions by participants during the study High
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Blinding of personnel/ care providers (performance bias): Performance bias due to knowledge of the allocated interventions by personnel/care providers during the study. High
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Blinding of outcome assessor (detection bias): Detection bias due to knowledge of the allocated interventions by outcome assessors. Low
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias): Attrition bias due to amount, nature or handling of incomplete outcome data Low 1/79
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Selective Reporting (reporting bias): Reporting bias due to selective outcome reporting
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Quality Rating
No quality rating data was found.