Table 1.
Characteristics of online alcohol-related randomized controlled trials
| Author | Recruitment Pool | Description and Size of Intervention Group | Description and Size of Control Group | Age Reported Mean (SD) and/or Range (Years) | Percent Female Gender |
| Bewick et al [49]a | University students recruited through a student experience survey | Personalized normative feedback n = 234 |
Assessment only n = 272 |
Mean 21.3 (SD 3.7) | 69 |
| Chiauzzi et al [45]b | 2nd and 4th year university students from 5 colleges who responded to local advertisement and subsequently screened as binge drinkers | MyStudentBody, a website that provides motivational feedback and alcohol-related resources n = 131 |
Alcohol and You, a website that provides educational material only n = 134 |
Mean 19.9 (SD 1.6) | 54 |
| Croom et al [19] | All incoming 1st year university students | Participant survey, knowledge test, and online course n = 1608 |
Survey and knowledge test n = 1608 |
18 to 24 | 49.1 |
| Cunningham et al [41]b | Problem drinkers identified through a general population telephone survey | Web-based personalized feedback (approximately 10 minutes) n = 92 |
List of alcohol education resources n = 93 |
Mean 40.1 (SD 13.4) | 47 |
| Doumas and Hannah [39]c | Workplace employees of 5 local companies | (1) Web-based feedback (approximately 15 minutes) n = 60 (2) Web-based feedback and motivational interviewing n = 63 |
Assessment only n = 73 |
18 to 24 | 73 |
| Doumas et al [43] | University students mandated for alcohol counselling | Web-based personalized normative feedback (15 minutes) n = 46 |
Web-based education (approximately 45 minutes) n = 31 |
Mean 19.2 (SD 1.33) 18 to 24 | 27.6 |
| Hester et al [40] | Newspaper advertisement recruiting heavy drinkers |
Online alcohol education resource and Web-based alcohol moderation program n = 40 |
Access to online alcohol education resources n = 44 |
Intervention group mean 48.7; control group mean 52.1 | 56 |
| Hustad et al [47]b,d | 1st year university students | (1) AlcoholEdu, 3-hour modularized program n = 26 (2) Alcohol eCHECKUP TO GO (eCHUG), 20-minute personalized normative feedback program n = 31 |
Assessment only n = 25 |
Mean 18.1 (SD 0.3) | 51 |
| Kypri et al [50]b | Heavy drinking university students majoring in psychology and attending university health care | Web-based motivational assessment and personalized feedback (10 to 15 minutes) n = 1251 |
Screening only n = 1184 |
Mean 19.7 (SD 1.8), 17 to 24 |
45.3 |
| Kypri et al [35]b | Undergraduate university students, who scored ≥ 8 on Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) | (1) Multidose motivational intervention n = 145 (2) Single dose motivational intervention n = 138 |
Information pamphlet n = 146 |
Mean 20.1 (SD 2.2), 17 to 29 |
52 |
| Matano et al [38] | Workplace employee website | Full individualized feedback regarding alcohol risk, information regarding alcohol use, and feedback regarding stress and coping n not specified |
General information regarding alcohol and limited individualized feedback regarding stress and coping n not specified |
Mean 39.9 (SD 11.3) | 77.9 |
| Moore et al [51] | Convenience sample of 1st year university students enrolled in 3 college courses | Web-based binge-drinking intervention n = 59 |
Correspondence-based binge-drinking intervention n = 57 |
Mean 21.7 (SD 0.2), 18 to 25 | 57.8 |
| Neighbors et al [44]b | University students turning 21 during 2 academic quarters who intended drinking 2 or more drinks on their birthday | Web-based personalized feedback n = 150 |
Assessment only n = 145 |
20 year olds | 51.1 |
| Riper et al [42]b | Advertisements in national newspapers and health-related websites recruiting adult problem drinkers | Web-based multi-component Cognitive Behaviour Therapy self-help intervention n = 130 |
Online psycho-educational alcohol use brochure n = 131 |
18 to 65, intervention group mean 45.9 (SD 8.9), control group mean 46.2 (SD 9.2) | 49 |
| Saitz et al [48] | 1st year university students identified as engaging in hazardous alcohol use ( ≥ 8 on AUDIT) | Extensive individualized brief feedback intervention n = 324 |
Individualised minimal brief intervention n = 326 |
18 and over | 63.7 |
| Walters et al [23] | 1st year university students assessed within the study as “at risk” drinkers | eCHUG, personalized normative feedback program (20 minutes) n not specified |
Assessment only n not specified |
Not specified | 48.1 |
| Weitzel et al [46] | University students who self-identified as drinking more than 1 once of alcohol per week recruited through emails and on-campus advertising | Online daily diary and individualized tailored messages n = 20 |
Online daily survey n = 20 |
Mean 19.2, 18 and over | 55 |
a Shown are baseline sample size and data. Data shown for this study in Tables 2 include only participants available at posttreatment.
b Intention-to-treat analysis was conducted on some or all measures.
c This study included a second intervention condition which consisted of Web-based feedback as well as motivational interviewing (MI). However, the motivational interviewing component was delivered face-to-face rather than via the Internet and, therefore, the effect size data from the second intervention condition is not included in calculations of mean effect sizes.
d Completion of AlcoholEdu program was a university-wide administrative requirement.