MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2291893845 · doi:10.2196/iproc.4692

Using Theoretically Tailored Mobile Communications to Target Risky Drinking Among Employed Adults: Design of a Randomized Effectiveness Trial

2015· article· en· W2291893845 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Deborah F. Van Marter, Leanne M. Mauriello, Emma de Aguiar

Bibliographic record

VenueIproceedings · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral Health and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbsenteeismProductivityEnvironmental healthRandomized controlled trialAlcohol consumptionConsumption (sociology)Occupational safety and healthMedicineGerontologyPsychologyAlcoholSocial psychologyEconomicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: A sizeable proportion of employed adults consume alcohol at non-dependent but risky levels, which is defined by the National Institutes of Health for men as drinking more than 14 drinks per week or more than 4 in a day and for women as drinking more than 7 drinks per week or more than 3 drinks in a day. Risky levels of drinking impact the health, well-being, and productivity of employees, while driving costs to employers in lost productivity, absenteeism, and health care costs. There is a lack of evidence-based behavior change programs targeting alcohol consumption for employer-sponsored wellness programs. Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of a stage-matched and individually tailored behavior change mHealth program based on the Transtheoretical Model of Behavior Change promoting responsible drinking to employed adults. Methods: A 2 arm randomized effectiveness trial is being conducted with 1,012 employed adults recruited by Survey Sampling, Inc. Participants randomized to the treatment group participate in the intervention across three timepoints and six months (0, 3, and 6 months), during which time the control group is asked to complete electronic assessments at two timepoints (0 and 6 months). Participants in both groups will be asked to complete electronic assessments at 12 and 18 months post baseline. Results: The effectiveness of the intervention will be assessed by comparing treatment and control participants on the following primary outcomes: a) proportion of participants who reach criteria (action or maintenance stages); b) quantity of alcohol use (number of drinks per week, number of drinks per drinking day); and c) frequency of alcohol use (days drinking above recommended limits during the past month, number of drinking days in the past month). Secondary outcomes include comparison on frequency of alcohol-related problems and well-being related to productivity. Conclusions: We hypothesize that the treatment group will demonstrate significant improvement on primary and secondary outcomes compared to control group participants. Using a mobile, responsive, and engaging platform, leveraging best practices of behavior change science including tailored communications, this program is well positioned to provide an efficacious, sustainable, and cost-effective means of reducing harmful drinking and the associated individual, employer, and societal impacts. Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02126163; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02126163 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation/6cXwhAGqW)

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.737

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.122
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.302 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIproceedingsSame topicBehavioral Health and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207