MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990220328 · doi:10.1016/j.invent.2019.100298

A randomized trial of brief web-based prevention of unhealthy alcohol use: Participant self-selection compared to a male young adult source population

2019· article· en· W2990220328 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternet Interventions · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthUniversity of Toronto
FundersChinese Society of Clinical OncologySchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSelection (genetic algorithm)Randomized controlled trialPopulationAlcoholPsychologyClinical psychologyWeb applicationMedicineEnvironmental healthComputer scienceWorld Wide WebBiologyArtificial intelligenceSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: How much a randomized controlled trial (RCT) sample is representative of or differs from its source population is a challenging question, with major implications for generalizability of results. It is particularly crucial for freely-available web-based interventions tested in RCTs since they are designed to reach broad populations and could increase health disparities if they fail to reach the more vulnerable individuals. We assessed the representativeness of a sample of participants in a primary/secondary prevention web-based brief intervention RCT in relation to its source population. Then we compared those recruited to those not recruited in the RCT. METHODS: There is a mandatory army recruitment process in Switzerland at age 19 for men. Between August 2010 and July 2011, 12,564 men (source population) attended two recruitment centers and were asked to answer a screening questionnaire on alcohol use. Among 11,819 (94.1%) who completed it, 7027 (59.5%) agreed to participate in a longitudinal cohort study with regular assessments. In 2012, these participants were invited to a web-based brief intervention RCT. Participation was not dependent on the presence or quantity of alcohol use. We assessed the representativeness of the RCT sample in relation to the source population and compared participants recruited/not recruited in the RCT with respect to education level and alcohol use. RESULTS: < 0.0001). Differences on alcohol use measures and education were similarly found when those recruited in the RCT were compared to those who were not, including in a multivariable model, showing independent associations between less unhealthy alcohol use and higher education and recruitment in the RCT. CONCLUSIONS: RCT participants differed from other members of the source population, with those participating in the RCT having higher prevalence of any alcohol use but lower levels of consumption and lower prevalence of indicators of unhealthy alcohol use. Individuals with higher education were overrepresented in the RCT sample. Selection bias may exist at both ends of the drinking spectrum and individuals with some indicators of greater vulnerability were less likely to participate. Results of web-based studies may not adequately generalize to the general population.Trial registration: The trial was registered at current controlled trials: ISRCTN55991918.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.327
Threshold uncertainty score0.725

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.289 · 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