MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2986679346 · doi:10.1111/add.14871

High‐ versus low‐intensity internet interventions for alcohol use disorders: results of a three‐armed randomized controlled superiority trial

2019· article· en· W2986679346 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher Sundström, Niels Eék, Martin Kraepelien, Claudia Fahlke, Mikael Gajecki, Miriam Jakobson, Maria Beckman, Viktor Kaldo, Anne H. Berman

Bibliographic record

VenueAddiction · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersVetenskapsrådet
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialAlcohol Use Disorders Identification TestMedicinePsychological interventionPopulationAlcohol use disorderBrief interventionRandomizationAlcohol dependenceAlcohol consumptionPsychiatryAlcoholPhysical therapyPoison controlInternal medicineInjury preventionEmergency medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: To test the efficacy of a therapist-guided high-intensity internet intervention compared with an unguided low-intensity internet intervention among individuals with alcohol use disorder. DESIGN: A three-group randomized controlled trial with follow-up assessments post-treatment (12 weeks) and 6 months post-randomization (primary end-point). SETTINGS: General population sample in Sweden. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 166 on-line self-referred adults (49% males) with a score of 14 (females)/16 (males) or more on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test, a preceding week alcohol consumption of 11 (females)/14 (males) or more standard drinks and an alcohol use disorder according to a diagnostic interview. INTERVENTIONS AND COMPARATORS: Both the high- (n = 72) and low-intensity internet interventions (n = 71) consisted of modules based on relapse prevention. Controls were on a waiting-list (n = 23), and were only followed until the post-treatment follow-up. Participants were randomized at a 7 : 7 : 2 ratio. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome was self-reported alcohol consumption in the preceding week measured as (1) number of standard drinks and (2) number of heavy drinking days at the 6-month follow-up. FINDINGS: Alcohol use disorders were largely in the severe category (74.7%), with the majority of participants having had alcohol problems for more than 5 years. Attrition was 13 and 22% at the post-treatment and 6-month follow-up, respectively. At the 6-month follow-up, an intent-to-treat analysis showed no significant differences in alcohol consumption between the high- and low-intensity interventions [standard drinks d = -0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) = -0.50 to 0.16; heavy drinking days: d = -0.07, 95% CI = -0.40 to 0.26]. Prevalence of negative effects was somewhat low (8-14%) in both intervention groups, as was deterioration (3-5%). CONCLUSIONS: At 6-month follow-up, there were no significant differences between a therapist-guided high-intensity internet intervention and an unguided low-intensity internet intervention in reducing alcohol consumption among individuals with an alcohol use disorder.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.546

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations44
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAddictionSame topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207