Innovative approaches to intervention for problem drinking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To critique the recent literature on telephone, correspondence-based, and computerized interventions for alcohol problems, which enhance or substitute for practitioner-delivered treatments. RECENT FINDINGS: There is an unmet need for screening, assessment and intervention for alcohol problems, in part because of the difficulty in accessing such treatment within the current health care system. Research on the efficacy of correspondence or electronic (for example Internet-based) interventions is beginning to emerge. In the period 2003-2004 we identified nine acceptability or feasibility studies of these approaches and seven efficacy trials covering a wide range of settings. These modes of intervention are acceptable to patients and the public, and with careful planning, can be implemented in a variety of settings. Treatment trials demonstrate the efficacy of these interventions in reducing hazardous drinking by university students, in delaying initiation of heavy drinking in children and adolescents, and, intriguingly, in addressing insomnia among recovering alcoholics. SUMMARY: There is strong support among potential users for alcohol interventions that employ telephone assistance, written correspondence, and the Internet. These new technologies offer the prospect of increasing the reach of interventions for problem drinking and being cost-effective alternatives or supplements to face-to-face health service delivery.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".