Skip to main content
. 2019 Dec 18;2019(12):CD001174. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001174.pub4

Saitz 2003.

Methods Cluster‐randomised trial
Participants Urban academic primary care practice: 41 faculty and resident primary care physicians and 312 patients with hazardous drinking
Interventions Providing physicians with alcohol screening results (CAGE questionnaire responses, alcohol consumption, and readiness to change) and recommendations for their patients at a visit
Outcomes Patient self‐report of discussions about alcohol use immediately after the physician visit and alcohol use 6 months later
Assessed at: 6 months
Notes 1 relevant comparison (reminders versus control/usual care)
The study was included in the review but not considered in the analysis because we were not able to calculate the denominators for each stratum: 240 patients for faculty physicians and 72 for residents but not separated by intervention and control groups
Funding: the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (grant031489), Princeton, New Jersey.
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Quote: "Physicians were stratified by level of training (resident or faculty) and were randomly assigned to the intervention or control group at the start of the study.' 'The computer‐generated randomization was done by off‐site data management personnel who had no patient or physician contact."
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Quote: "...was done by off‐site data management personnel who had no patient or physician contact."
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) 
 All outcomes Unclear risk It was unclear if participants were blinded and this could have an important impact on effect estimates
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk Quote: "...at follow‐up, interviews were done without knowledge of group assignment."
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk 41 out of 50 (82%) randomised physicians completed the study
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Unclear risk Only patient‐reported outcomes included
Other bias Unclear risk No additional source identified