Efficacy of an Online Self-Help Treatment for Comorbid Alcohol Misuse and Emotional Problems in Young Adults: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial (Preprint)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND Alcohol misuse and emotional problems (ie, depression and anxiety) are highly comorbid among Canadian young adults. However, there is a lack of integrated, accessible, and evidence-based treatment options for these young adults. OBJECTIVE The main goal of this study is to develop and test the efficacy of an integrated, online self-help program designed to target both alcohol misuse and emotional problems. METHODS A two-arm randomized controlled trial design will be used to compare the efficacy of the online integrated treatment to a psychoeducational control group. A target sample of 214 participants will be recruited and randomly assigned to either condition. The integrated treatment will last 8 weeks, and participants will work through 12 modules. Modules will incorporate content based on principles of cognitive behavioral therapy and motivational interviewing. Participants in the control group will receive links to psychoeducational resources and will have access to the full treatment after follow-up. The primary outcome will be the number of Canadian standard drinks consumed in the week leading up the assessment. Secondary outcomes of interest include symptoms of depression, anxiety, alcohol-related problems, quality of life, and use of other drugs. Assessments will be completed at 3 time-points: at baseline, at the end of treatment (ie, 8 weeks), and at follow-up (ie, 24 weeks). Upon completion, data will be analyzed using generalized linear mixed models. RESULTS Data collection began in June 2018 and will continue until January 2020. Final study results will be submitted for publication by July 2020. CONCLUSIONS Currently, there are no integrated treatments designed to target alcohol misuse and the range of emotional problems experienced by young adults. This research stands to provide an effective, accessible (ie, Web-based), and feasible option to treat the many struggling young adults in this country. CLINICALTRIAL ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT03406039; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03406039 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/72fDefnrh) REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER PRR1-10.2196/11298
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes | Randomized trial | high |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Randomized trial | high |
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 | 0.036 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.097 | 0.015 |
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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".