Cochrane Review: Universal school‐based prevention programs for alcohol misuse in young people
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Alcohol misuse in young people is cause of concern for health services, policy makers, prevention workers, criminal justice system, youth workers, teachers, parents. This is one of three reviews examining the effectiveness of (1) school‐based, (2) family‐based, and (3) multi‐component prevention programs. Objectives To review evidence on the effectiveness of universal school‐based prevention programs in preventing alcohol misuse in school‐aged children up to 18 years of age. Search methods Relevant evidence (up to 2002) was selected from the previous Cochrane review. Later studies, to July 2010, were identified from MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, Project CORK, and PsycINFO. Selection criteria Randomized trials evaluating universal school‐based prevention programs and reporting outcomes for alcohol use in students 18 years of age or younger were included. Two reviewers screened titles/abstracts and full text of identified records. Data collection and analysis Two reviewers extracted relevant data independently using an a priori defined extraction form. Risk of bias was assessed. Main results 53 trials were included, most of which were cluster‐randomised. The reporting quality of trials was poor, only 3.8% of them reporting adequate method of randomisation and program allocation concealment. Incomplete data was adequately addressed in 23% of the trials. Due to extensive heterogeneity across interventions, populations, and outcomes, the results were summarized only qualitatively. Six of the 11 trials evaluating alcohol‐specific interventions showed some evidence of effectiveness compared to a standard curriculum. In 14 of the 39 trials evaluating generic interventions, the program interventions demonstrated significantly greater reductions in alcohol use either through a main or subgroup effect. Gender, baseline alcohol use, and ethnicity modified the effects of interventions. Results from the remaining 3 trials with interventions targeting cannabis, alcohol, and/or tobacco were inconsistent. Authors' conclusions This review identified studies that showed no effects of preventive interventions, as well as studies that demonstrated statistically significant effects. There was no easily discernible pattern in characteristics that would distinguish trials with positive results from those with no effects. Most commonly observed positive effects across programs were for drunkenness and binge drinking. Current evidence suggests that certain generic psychosocial and developmental prevention programs can be effective and could be considered as policy and practice options. These include the Life Skills Training Program, the Unplugged program, and the Good Behaviour Game. A stronger focus of future research on intervention program content and delivery context is warranted. Plain Language Summary Psychosocial and Developmental Alcohol Misuse Prevention in Schools can be effective We conducted a Cochrane systematic review of 53 well‐designed experimental studies that examined the effectiveness of school‐based universal programs for the prevention of alcohol misuse in young people. The studies were divided into two major groups based on the nature of the prevention program: 1) programs targeting specifically prevention or reduction of alcohol misuse and 2) generic programs with wider focus for prevention (e.g., other drug use/abuse, antisocial behavior). In the review we found studies that showed no effects of the preventive program, as well as studies that demonstrated statistically significant effects. There was no easily discernible pattern in program characteristics that would distinguish studies with positive results from those with no effects. Most commonly observed positive effects across programs were for drunkenness and binge drinking. In conclusion, current evidence suggests that certain generic psychosocial and developmental prevention programs can be effective and could be considered as policy and practice options. These include the Life Skills Training Program, the Unplugged program, and the Good Behaviour Game.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".