↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
A Text Message Intervention with Adaptive Goal Support to Reduce Alcohol Consumption Among Non-Treatment-Seeking Young Adults: Non-Randomized Clinical Trial with Voluntary Length of Enrollment
Published in
JMIR mHealth and uHealth, February 2018
DOI 10.2196/mhealth.8530
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Stand-alone text message-based interventions can reduce binge drinking episodes (≥4 drinks for women and ≥5 drinks for men) among nontreatment-seeking young adults, but may not be optimized. Adaptive text message support could enhance effectiveness by assisting context-specific goal setting and striving, but it remains unknown how to best integrate it into text message interventions. The objective of this study was to evaluate young adults' engagement with a text message intervention, Texting to Reduce Alcohol Consumption 2 (TRAC2), which focuses on reducing weekend alcohol consumption. TRAC2 incorporated preweekend drinking-limit goal-commitment ecological momentary assessments (EMA) tailored to past 2-week alcohol consumption, intraweekend goal reminders, self-efficacy EMA with support tailored to goal confidence, and maximum weekend alcohol consumption EMA with drinking limit goal feedback. We enrolled 38 nontreatment-seeking young adults (aged 18 to 25 years) who screened positive for hazardous drinking in an urban emergency department. Following a 2-week text message assessment-only run-in, subjects were given the opportunity to enroll in 4-week intervention blocks. We examined patterns of EMA responses and voluntary re-enrollment. We then examined how goal commitment and goal self-efficacy related to event-level alcohol consumption. Finally, we examined the association of length of TRAC2 exposure with alcohol-related outcomes from baseline to 3-month follow-up. Among a diverse sample of young adults (56% [28/50] female, 54% [27/50] black, 32% [12/50] college enrolled), response rates to EMA queries were, on average, 82% for the first 4-week intervention block, 75% for the second 4-week block, and 73% for the third 4-week block. In the first 4 weeks of the intervention, drinking limit goal commitment was made 68/71 times it was prompted (96%). The percentage of subjects being prompted to commit to a drinking limit goal above the binge threshold was 52% (15/29) in week 1 and decreased to 0% (0/15) by week 4. Subjects met their goal 130/146 of the times a goal was committed to (89.0%). There were lower rates of goal success when subjects reported lower confidence (score <4) in meeting the goal (76% [32/42 weekends]) compared with that when subjects reported high confidence (98% [56/57 weekends]; P=.001). There were reductions in alcohol consumption from baseline to 3 months, but reductions were not different by length of intervention exposure. Preliminary evidence suggests that nontreatment-seeking young adults will engage with a text message intervention incorporating self-regulation support features, resulting in high rates of weekend drinking limit goal commitment and goal success.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 73 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Researcher 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Professor 4 5%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 27 37%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 17 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 10%
Social Sciences 5 7%
Computer Science 4 5%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 30 41%
Attention Score in Context

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 23 May 2018.
All research outputs
#8,585,350
of 27,651,521 outputs
Outputs from JMIR mHealth and uHealth
#1,386
of 2,705 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,408
of 354,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JMIR mHealth and uHealth
#55
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,651,521 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,705 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.2. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 354,986 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 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.