| Title |
Mobile Interventions Targeting Risky Drinking Among University Students: A Review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Addiction Reports, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40429-016-0099-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anne H. Berman, Mikael Gajecki, Kristina Sinadinovic, Claes Andersson |
| Abstract |
Mobile interventions based on text messages, automated telephone programs (interactive voice response (IVR)), and smartphone apps offer a new approach targeting hazardous alcohol use in university students. This review covers seven recent studies involving college or university students that evaluated intervention efficacy in comparison to controls: four using text messages, one using IVR, and two smartphone apps. Only the study evaluating IVR reported positive results for the primary outcome. Two of the text message studies reported positive results on secondary outcomes, while the other two reported no differences in comparison to control groups. For smartphone apps, one study reported positive results on secondary outcomes, while the other showed no differences in comparison to controls for a web-based app and negative results for a native app. Further development of mobile interventions is needed for this at-risk population, both in terms of intervention content and use of robust research designs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sweden | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 68 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 22% |
| Researcher | 14 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 9% |
| Professor | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 13% |
| Unknown | 12 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 21 | 31% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 9% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Unknown | 20 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 17 December 2018.
All research outputs
#7,120,156
of 24,739,153 outputs
Outputs from Current Addiction Reports
#144
of 365 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,246
of 306,599 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Addiction Reports
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,739,153 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 365 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 306,599 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.