Holder 2000.
Methods |
Study design: controlled before‐after study Sampling frame: adult population Sampling method: random‐digit dialing telephone survey Collection method: phone interviews, police incidence reports, and emergency services records Description of the community coalition: Coalition included local law enforcement officers, medical service providers, alcohol‐beverage control agents, CBO staff, community activists, parents, and youth |
|
Participants |
Communities: 2 California communities and 1 South Carolina community, compared with similar communities that did not receive the intervention Country: USA Ages included in assessment: general public Reasons provided for selection of intervention community: Intervention sites had existing community coalitions through which the intervention could be implemented Intervention community (population size): approximately 100,000 at each site Comparison community (population size): approximately 100,000 at each site |
|
Interventions |
Name of intervention: Community Trials Project Theory: not reported Aim: to reduce excessive drinking and related injury and violence problems Description of costs and resources: not reported Components of the intervention: (1) community mobilization; (2) community awareness; (3) responsible beverage service; (4) underage‐access law enforcement; and (5) intoxicated‐patron law enforcement Start date: 1992 Duration: 48 months |
|
Outcomes |
Outcomes and measures: alcohol‐related traffic accidents and assaults with emergency services events Time points: time series accident data from 1988 to 1997, hospital discharge data from 1991 to 1997 |
|
Notes | Outcomes measured at population level Funding source: government |
|
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | High risk | Not randomly assigned communities |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | High risk | No allocation concealment |
Baseline outcome measurement similar | Unclear risk | Matched comparison communities |
Baseline characteristics similar | Unclear risk | Matched comparison communities |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Data collected from state records and hospital emergency services records |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Data collected from state records and hospital emergency services records |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Change in outcome assessed by population survey and public records |
Protection against contamination | Unclear risk | Do not describe geographic proximity of control communities |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | Relevant outcome data were reported |