| Title |
Computer-Based Interventions for Problematic Alcohol Use: a Review of Systematic Reviews
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12529-016-9601-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christopher Sundström, Matthijs Blankers, Zarnie Khadjesari |
| Abstract |
The aim of this review is to provide an overview of knowledge and knowledge gaps in the field of computer-based alcohol interventions by (1) collating evidence on the effectiveness of computer-based alcohol interventions in different populations and (2) exploring the impact of four specified moderators of effectiveness: therapeutic orientation, length of intervention, guidance and trial engagement. A review of systematic reviews of randomized trials reporting on effectiveness of computer-based alcohol interventions published between 2005 and 2015. Fourteen reviews met the inclusion criteria. Across the included reviews, it was generally reported that computer-based alcohol interventions were effective in reducing alcohol consumption, with mostly small effect sizes. There were indications that longer, multisession interventions are more effective than shorter or single session interventions. Evidence on the association between therapeutic orientation of an intervention, guidance or trial engagement and reductions in alcohol consumption is limited, as the number of reviews addressing these themes is low. None of the included reviews addressed the association between therapeutic orientation, length of intervention or guidance and trial engagement. This review of systematic reviews highlights the mostly positive evidence supporting computer-based alcohol interventions as well as reveals a number of knowledge gaps that could guide future research in this field. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 5 | 45% |
| United States | 2 | 18% |
| Sweden | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 3 | 27% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 5 | 45% |
| Members of the public | 4 | 36% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 9% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 157 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 157 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 23 | 15% |
| Researcher | 22 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 6% |
| Other | 21 | 13% |
| Unknown | 41 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 38 | 24% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 17 | 11% |
| Unknown | 54 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 November 2023.
All research outputs
#1,750,088
of 25,765,370 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Behavioral Medicine
#62
of 1,037 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,284
of 325,150 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Behavioral Medicine
#3
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,765,370 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,037 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 325,150 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.