MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048442845 · doi:10.2196/19720

Evaluating the Efficacy of a Mobile App (Drinks:Ration) and Personalized Text and Push Messaging to Reduce Alcohol Consumption in a Veteran Population: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

2020· article· en· W3048442845 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Daniel Leightley, Roberto J. Rona, James Shearer, Charlotte Williamson, Cerisse Gunasinghe, Amos Simms, Nicola T. Fear, Laura Goodwin, Dominic Murphy

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNIHR Maudsley Biomedical Research CentreMedical Research CouncilForces in Mind TrustNational Lottery Community FundNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchDepartment of Health and Social Care
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialMedicinePopulationPsychological interventionAlcohol Use Disorders Identification TestmHealthMental healthBrief interventionIntervention (counseling)Physical therapyPsychiatryPoison controlEnvironmental healthInjury preventionSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Alcohol misuse is higher in the UK Armed Forces than in the general population. Previous research has shown that interventions delivered via smartphones are efficacious in promoting self-monitoring of alcohol use, have utility in reducing alcohol consumption, and have a broad reach. OBJECTIVE: This single-blinded randomized controlled trial (RCT) aims to assess the efficacy of a 28-day brief alcohol intervention delivered via a smartphone app (Drinks:Ration) in reducing weekly self-reported alcohol consumption between baseline and 3-month follow-up among veterans who drink at a hazardous or harmful level and receive or have received support for mental health symptoms in a clinical setting. METHODS: In this two-arm, single-blinded RCT, a smartphone app that includes interactive features designed to enhance participants' motivation and personalized messaging is compared with a smartphone app that provides only government guidance on alcohol consumption. The trial will be conducted in a veteran population that has sought help through Combat Stress, a UK veteran's mental health charity. Recruitment, consent, and data collection will be carried out automatically through the Drinks:Ration platform. The primary outcome is the change in self-reported weekly alcohol consumption between baseline (day 0) and 3-month follow-up (day 84) as measured using the Time-Line Follow back for Alcohol Consumption. Secondary outcome measures include (1) change in the baseline to 3-month follow-up (day 84) Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test score and (2) change in the baseline to 3-month follow-up (day 84) World Health Organization Quality of Life-BREF score to assess the quality of adjusted life years. Process evaluation measures include (1) app use and (2) usability ratings as measured by the mHealth App Usability Questionnaire. The primary and secondary outcomes will also be reassessed at the 6-month follow-up (day 168) to assess the longer-term benefits of the intervention, which will be reported as a secondary outcome. RESULTS: The study will begin recruitment in October 2020 and is expected to require 12 months to complete. The study results will be published in 2022. CONCLUSIONS: This study assesses whether a smartphone app is efficacious in reducing self-reported alcohol consumption in a veteran population that has sought help through Combat Stress using personalized messaging and interactive features. This innovative approach, if successful, may provide a means to deliver a low-cost health promotion program that has the potential to reach large groups, in particular those who are geographically dispersed, such as military personnel. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04494594; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04494594. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/19720.

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)0.003
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.124
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.364
GPT teacher head0.594
Teacher spread0.229 · 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
GenreProtocol

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

Citations18
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207