Skip to main content
. 2016 Jul 18;2016(7):CD007025. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007025.pub4

Palmer 2004.

Methods Design: RCT
Follow‐up: 3 months
Attrition:20 %
Participants Mean age (years): not stated
Sex: 53% female
N participants: 214
Allocation: n = 119 voluntary; n = 85 control
Setting: university heavy drinkers
Country: USA
Interventions Programme type: the Alcohol Skills Training Programme Interventiom (ASTP)
Set‐up: 2 workshops with 8‐12 participants
Key components: used reflective listening and motivational interviewing techniques to built rapport, minimise resistance, and present the non‐judgmental philosophy of the workshop
Duration: 2 90 min sessions
Control: no intervention
Outcomes Outcomes: drinking days/week; drinks on peak occasion; average drinks per occasion; total drinks per week; RAPI total; defensiveness; readiness to change
Measures: Rutgers Alcohol Problems Index; Brief Drinker Profile; Single item Q/F/P index; Modified Daily Drinking Questionnaire; Readiness to Change Questionnaire; defensiveness Scale; Therapeutic Reactance Scale; Drinking Norms Rating form; revised version of the General Causality Orientation scale; Campus Alcohol Policies Scale; Comprehensive Effects of Alcohol Scale; Participants Satisfaction Scale; Adherence and Competence Measure
Funding and Declared Conflicts of Interest Not stated
Notes Insufficient details in dissertation for inclusion in MA. Further information requested
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 20% attrition rate
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk all data reported
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) 
 All outcomes High risk Not possible to blind participants to intervention. No information about MI counsellor blinding
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 All outcomes Unclear risk Insufficient information to permit judgement
Unit of Analysis issues Low risk Not applicable