Nirenberg 2013.

Methods	Design: RCT Follow‐up: 6 months Attrition: 7%
Participants	Mean age (years): 17.9 Sex: 69% male N participants:990 Allocation: n = 323 MI plus a hospital trauma centre visit/exposure (MI‐H); n = 332 MI; n = 335 control Setting: Court referred 16‐21 year olds as part of their community service sanctions for high‐risk driving and/or alcohol/other drug charges Country: USA
Interventions	Programme type: MI Set‐up: 4 group sessions, 1 individual session, and a community service experience. 2 MI groups: 1 (MI) received MI as described above; the other received MI‐H. The 2 MI groups were combined for analysis and compared with counselling service only (CS) Key components: stressed the pivotal role of the participant in the decision to change behaviour, the locus of control for change resting with the youth, and the non‐judgmental role of the counsellor Duration: 19 h Control: alternative intervention
Outcomes	Outcomes: drinking in a hazardous manner Measures: modified AUDIT
Funding and Declared Conflicts of Interest	Funded by NIAAA. No information or declarations about potential conflicts of interest
Notes	—
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to permit judgement
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to permit judgement
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Attrition 7%
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	All alcohol outcomes reported
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Not possible to blind participants to intervention. Insufficient information to make a judgement about blinding of therapists
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to permit judgement
Unit of Analysis issues	Low risk	Not applicable