Universal alcohol misuse prevention programmes for children and adolescents: Cochrane systematic reviews
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Alcohol misuse by young people causes significant health and social harm, including death and disability. Therefore, prevention of youth alcohol misuse is a policy aim in many countries. Our aim was to examine the effectiveness of (1) school-based, (2) family-based and (3) multi-component universal alcohol misuse prevention programmes in children and adolescents. METHODS: Three Cochrane systematic reviews were performed: searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Project CORK and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials up to July 2010, including randomised trials evaluating universal alcohol misuse prevention programmes in school, family or multiple settings in youths aged 18 years or younger. Two independent reviewers identified eligible studies and any discrepancies were resolved via discussion. RESULTS: A total of 85 trials were included in the reviews of school (n = 53), family (n = 12) and multi-component (n = 20) programmes. Meta-analysis was not performed due to study heterogeneity. Most studies were conducted in North America. Risk of bias assessment revealed problems related to inappropriate unit of analysis, moderate to high attrition, selective outcome reporting and potential confounding. Certain generic psychosocial and life skills school-based programmes were effective in reducing alcohol use in youth. Most family-based programmes were effective. There was insufficient evidence to conclude that multiple interventions provided additional benefit over single interventions. CONCLUSIONS: In these Cochrane reviews, some school, family or multi-component prevention programmes were shown to be effective in reducing alcohol misuse in youths. However, these results warrant a cautious interpretation, since bias and/or contextual factors may have affected the trial results. Further research should replicate the most promising studies identified in these reviews and pay particular attention to content and context factors through rigorous evaluation.
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 | 0.009 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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 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".