Table 1.
Published reports of controlled studies of very-brief (≤15 min) web-based interventions for college students/young adults.
| References | Sample | Elements | Auto fb? | Multi fb? | N | pct. Male (%) | M age | Control group | Time-points (follow-up rates) | Effect size estimates for alcohol-consumption and alcohol-related problems outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bewick (19) | All students | F S R I | Yes | Yes | 506 | 31 | 21 | Assess only | 12 weeks (63%) | Alcohol units per occasion: 0.29 Units of alcohol per week: 0.04a Proportion heavy drinking pre/post: 0.17a CAGE measure: 0.02a |
| Bewick (47) | Any drinkers | F S R I | Yes | Yes | 1112 | 27 | 21 | Assess only | 8 weeks (62%) 16 weeks (42%) 24 weeks (34%) |
Units of alcohol per occasion Immediate versus delayed: −0.02 (8 weeks), −0.09 (16 weeks), −0.05 (24 weeks)a Immediate versus Control: −0.01 (8 weeks), −0.01 (16 weeks), −0.02 (24 weeks)a Alcohol units per week Comparison between immediate versus delayed intervention conditions: –0.09 (8 weeks), −0.10 (16 weeks), −0.13 (24 weeks)a Immediate versus control condition: −0.09 (8 weeks), −0.02 (16 weeks), 0.01 (24 weeks)a |
| Bewick (48) | Any drinkers | F S R I | Yes | Yes | 1478 | 30 | 21 | Assess only | 16 weeks (50%) 34 weeks (44%) |
Units of alcohol per occasion: 0.36 (16 weeks), 0.20 (34 weeks)a Units of alcohol per week: 0.11 (16 weeks), −0.02 (34 weeks)a |
| Cunningham (24) | Heavy drinkers | F S I | Yes | Yes | 425 | 53 | 23 | Assess only | 6 weeks (68%) | AUDIT-C scores (0.13)a |
| Ekman (49) | Heavy drinkers | F S I | Yes | Yes | 654, but results only for those with full data: n = 158 | 42 | 18–20 (16%) 21–25 (76%) ≥26 (8%) |
Very-brief feedback | 3 months (38%) 6 months (24%) |
Weekly consumption in grams: 0.19 (3 months), 0.23 (6 months)a Peak eBAC: −0.11 (3 months), −0.05 (6 months)a Heavy drinking: 0.04 (3 months), 0.13 (6 months)a |
| Kypri (50) | Hazardous drinkers | F S R I | Yes | Yes | 2435 | 55 | 20 | Assess only | 1 month (78%) 6 months (65%) |
Quantity per occasion: 0.11 (1 month), 0.05 (6 months)a Overall volume of alcohol consumption: 0.15 (1 month), 0.13 (6 months)a Frequency of alcohol consumption: 0.17 (1 month), 0.15 (6 months)a Binge drinking: 0.14 (1 month), 0.06 (6 months)a Heavy drinking: 0.38 (1 month), 0.33 (6 months)a Academic consequences: 0.08 (1 month), 0.04 (6 months)a Other consequences: 0.05 (1 month), 0.05 (6 months)a |
| Kypri (51) | Heavy drinkers | F S R I | Yes | Yes | 1789 | 35 | 20 | Assess only | 5 months (79%) | Quantity per occasion: 0.09 Overall volume of alc. cons.: 0.16 Frequency of alcohol consumption: 0.13 Binge drinking: 0.12a Heavy drinking: 0.24a Academic consequences: 0.13 |
| Kypri (52) | Heavy drinkers | F S R I | Yes | Yes | 3422 | 43 | 20 | Assess only | 5 months (83%) | Quantity per occasion: 0.04a Overall volume of alc. cons.: 0.00a Frequency of alcohol consumption: 0.03a Binge drinking: 0.10a Heavy drinking: 0.14a Academic consequences: 0.01 |
| LaBrie (30) | Heavy drinkers | F | Yes | No | 1480b | 43c | 20c | Attention control | 1 month (90%) 3 months (87%) 6 months (84%) 12 months (86%) |
Drinks per week:0.19 (1 month), 0.24 (3 months), 0.20 (6 months), 0.13 (12 months)a,d Frequency of alcohol cons.: 0.24 (1 month), 0.18 (3 months), 0.28 (6 months), 0.12 (12 months)a,d Peak number of drinks: 0.02 (1 month), 0.07 (3 months), 0.11 (6 months), −0.01 (12 months)a,d Negative consequences: 0.19 (1 month), 0.20 (3 months), 0.24 (6 months), 0.18 (12 months)a,d |
| Lewis (31) | Heavy drinkers | F | Yes | No | 240e | 42f | 20f | Attention control | 3 months (90%) | Drinks per occasion: 0.43 (3 months), 0.34 (6 months)a Drinks per week: 0.28 (3 months), 0.18 (6 months)a |
| 6 months (85%) | Frequency of alcohol consumption:0.32 (3 months), 0.14 (6 months)a Negative conseq.: 0.13 (3 months), −0.05 (6 months)a |
|||||||||
| Martens (53) | Varsity athletes | F S | No | Yes | 263 | 24 | 20 | Educ only | 1 month (89%) 6 months (81%) |
Drinks per week: n2 = 0.004 (1 month), 0.005 (6 months) Peak eBAC: n2 = 0.007 (1 month), 0.04 (6 months) Alc.-related probs: n2 = 0.017 (1 month), 0.005 (6 months) |
| McCambridge (54) | All students | F S I | Yes | Yes | 7809 | 49 | 18–20 (27%) 21–25 (56%) ≥26 (17%) |
Assess only and no contact | 3 months (52%) | Intervention versus. assess only AUDIT-C: −0.01 pct. risky drinking: 0.03a Intervention versus no contact AUDIT-C 0.05 pct. risky drinking: 0.08a |
| Moreira (55) | All students | F R I | No | Yes | 1751 | 38 | 17–19 (60%) 20–24 (34%) ≥25 (6%) |
Assess only and no contact | 6 months (50%) 12 months (41%) |
Quantity of alcohol per occasion 0.05 (6 months), 0.10 (12 months)a AUDIT score: 0.03 (6 months), 0.12 (12 months)a Alcohol-related problems −0.02 (6 months), −0.03 (12 months)g,a |
| Neighbors (26) | Heavy drinkers | F | Yes | No | 818 | 42 | 18 | Attention control | 6 months (92%) 12 months (87%) 18 months (84%) 24 months (81%) |
Weekly drinking Time × study condition interactions: range from 0.07 to 0.16 Heavy drinking Time × study condition interactions: range from −0.03 to 0.08 Alcohol-related problems Time × study condition interactions: range from −0.02 to 0.11 |
| Palfai (56) | All students | F S R I | Yes | Yes | 705 | 29 | 18 | Non-alcohol-related feedback | 5 months (53%) | Drinks per week :0.07a Any drinking: 0.21a Heavy drinking: 0.06a Risky drinking: −0.01a Alcohol-related consequences: −0.11a |
All effect size estimates are Cohen’s d unless otherwise noted. Elements = intervention elements [F = personalized feedback; S = protective behavioral strategies; R = resources for behavior change (e.g., counseling); I = general alcohol information]; Auto fb? = is feedback generated automatically by program? Multi fb? = does feedback include multiple components? N = number of participants; assess = assessment; educ = education; eBAC = estimated blood alcohol concentration; wk = week; mo = month.
Alcohol-related sample distinctions: all students = anyone from the student body allowed to enroll; any drinkers = study had a minimal drinking inclusion criterion; heavy drinkers = study required participants to self-report a substantial amount of alcohol consumption to enroll; hazardous drinkers = study required participants to score of 8 or higher on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) in order to enroll.
AUDIT-C: first three items of the AUDIT, which concern alcohol consumption.
aEffect size calculations made by authors of the present review.
bOne study condition omitted from review because it was not very-brief in duration.
cFigures reported for the entire sample though we do not consider results with one study condition in the present review because it was not very-brief in duration.
dFor parsimony, only comparison between control condition and personalized normative feedback, including typical student norms reported, because this type of feedback had the strongest evidence of efficacy in this study, which included eight different types of personalized normative feedback.
eStudy conditions focused on alcohol-related risky sexual behavior omitted, leaving only an intervention focused solely on alcohol and the control condition.
fFigures reported for the entire sample though we do not consider results with two study conditions in the present review because the intervention in these conditions was not focused solely on alcohol.
gAuthors also reported results with higher-risk subsample but results were similar, thus we opted to display only results involving larger sample.