Advanced Search

Study Preview



Study Title and Description

Screening and brief intervention with adolescents with risky alcohol use in school-based health centers: A randomized clinical trial of the Check Yourself tool.



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

Primary Publication Information
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
TitleData
Title Screening and brief intervention with adolescents with risky alcohol use in school-based health centers: A randomized clinical trial of the Check Yourself tool.
Author McCarty CA., Gersh E., Katzman K., Lee CM., Sucato GS., Richardson LP.
Country a Department of Pediatrics , University of Washington , Seattle , Washington , USA.
Year 2019
Numbers Pubmed ID: 30883284

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


Extraction Form: Evidence Map
Arms
Number Title Description Comments
1 TAU school based health center
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
2 MI Check Yourself tool, an electronic tool that gives motivational feedback on substance use and summarizes results for providers.
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Design Details
Question... Follow Up Answer Follow-up Answer
Should this citation be included? Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Does this paper originate from a primary study of interest? No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Ages eligible (in years) 13
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
18
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Total sample size (in all arms) 148
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Age distribution of enrolled population (in years) 16.09
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nr
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Substance used Alcohol
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Alcohol
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Cannabis
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Interventions studied? Behavioral
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Behavioral
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Outcome? Objective measurement of use/abstinence and/or intensity
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Self report of use/abstinence and/or intensity
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Objective measurement of use/abstinence and/or intensity
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Self report of use/abstinence and/or intensity
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Age variation of enrolled population (in years) 1.19
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nr
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nr
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nr
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nr
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Study type RCT
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Is any arm a brief intervention (or single session)? Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Income level of country(ies) of origin Upper income
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Upper income
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |




Results & Comparisons


Results Data
P-Value P-Value
Outcome: alcohol use days      Population: All Participants Between-Arm Comparisons
Time Point Measure TAU MI Comparison Measure MI vs. TAU


0 months

N Analyzed 214 214 nr
Mean 2.5 2.84
SD 2.78 3.88


2 months

N Analyzed 214 214 0.25
Mean 2.14 2.66
SD 2.32 4.72
P-Value P-Value
Outcome: drinks per drinking day      Population: All Participants Between-Arm Comparisons
Time Point Measure TAU MI Comparison Measure TAU vs. MI


0 months

N Analyzed 214 214 nr
Mean 3.12 1.91
SD 1.97 2.4


2 months

N Analyzed 214 214 0.001
Mean 2.83 1.73
SD 1.77 1.73
P-Value P-Value
Outcome: cannabis use days      Population: All Participants Between-Arm Comparisons
Time Point Measure TAU MI Comparison Measure TAU vs. MI


0 months

N Analyzed 214 214 nr
Mean 5.47 4.78
SD 9.15 8.12


2 months

N Analyzed 214 214 0.58
Mean 3.8 3.92
SD 6.72 7.54


Quality Dimensions
Dimension Value Notes Comments
Intention-to-treat-analysis: Bias due to incomplete reporting and analysis according to group allocation No
  • 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
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Compliance (performance bias): Performance bias due to inappropriate compliance with interventions across groups Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Timing of outcome assessments (detection bias): Detection bias because important outcomes were not measured at the same time across groups Yes
  • 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 Low
  • 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. High
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias): Attrition bias due to amount, nature or handling of incomplete outcome data Low Post randomization exclusion of low risk alcohol users could have led to imbalanced groups, but didn't.
  • 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.