Skip to main content
. 2020 Aug 7;11:768. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00768

Table 4.

Effect sizes.

Study Intervention in TG Dependent variable Effect sizes for 3-months post assessments Effect sizes for 6-months post assessments Type of analysis
  Within-condition for TG Between-condition for TG vs. alc.-unrelated CG Between-condition for TG vs. alc.-related CG Within-condition for TG Between-condition for TG vs. alc.-unrelated CG Between-condition for TG vs. alc.-related CG
MAIN OUTCOMES Hedge’s gav Hedge’s gs Hedge’s gs Hedge’s gav Hedge’s gs Hedge’s gs  
(1) Alcohol-related symptoms
Nadkarni et al. (89) MI + CBT AUDIT 0.65 0.12 Intent-to-treat a
L’Engle et al. (102) MI + RH counseling AUDIT 1.78 0.60 Complete case a
Wandera et al. (99) MI + HIV counseling AUDIT (modified to 3-months reference period) 0.65 -0.19 0.64 -0.04 Intent-to-treat
Pengpid et al. (104) MI ASSIST-SSIS for alcohol 2.07 0.17 b 2.53 0.55 b Intent-to-treat
Pengpid et al. (103) MI + behav. elements AUDIT (modified to 6-months reference period) 1.42 -0.15 Intent-to-treat
Witte et al. (91) MI + HIV counseling AUDIT 1.26 -0.46 -0.20 1.50 -0.36 -0.39 Intent-to-treat
Sorsdahl et al. (98) MI + CBT ASSIST-SSIS for alcohol 2.15 c 0.83 c Complete case d
Peltzer et al. (93) MI behav. elements AUDIT (modified to 3-months reference period) 1.82 -0.17 2.46 0.23 Intent-to-treat
Assanangkornchai et al. (101) MI ASSIST-SSIS for alcohol 1.83 0.13 2.54 0.19 Intent-to-treat
Mertens et al. (97) MI ASSIST-SSIS for alcohol 1.20 0.06 Complete case d
Sheikh et al. (90) MI + relative as co-therap. AUDIT-C 3.61 e 2.15 e Complete case
(2) Alcohol amount consumed per defined unit
Nadkarni et al. 2017 (89) MI + CBT Mean standard drinks per day (past 14 d) 0.17 Intent-to-treat
Papas et al. (112) CBT Mean standard drinks per drinking day (past 30 d) 0.96 0.40 Complete case
Noknoy et al. (105) MI Mean standard drinks per drinking day (past 7 d) 0.66 0.62 0.80 0.52 Intent-to-treat
Wandera et al. (99) MI + HIV counseling Mean standard drinks per drinking day (past 3 months) -0.06 -0.27 -0.07 -0.10 Intent-to-treat
Pengpid et al. (104) MI Past week alcoholic use units 0.79 0.20 b 0.87 0.10 b Intent-to-treat
(3) Other outcomes
Kalichman et al. (95) MI + HIV counseling No. of times of alcohol use before sex (past month) 0.49 0.36 0.29 0.34 Intent-to-treat
Pal et al. (100) MI Number of d used alcohol (past 30 d) 1.58 0.87 Complete case
Omeje et al. (87) Rational-Emotive Th. AUDS f 7.42 g 5.85 g Complete case
Segatto et al. (88) MI mean no. of alcohol use days (past 3 months) 0.45 -0.13 Complete case
a

data of relevant outcome was provided from authors upon request.

b

Hedge’s gs value is based on a comparison of CG1 (alcohol use only) and CG2 (tobacco use only) since an integrative treatment condition (tobacco + alcohol) was not of interest here.

c

Displayed is the effect size value of TG2 (enhanced condition). Effect size values for TG1 are: gav=1.17 and gs=0.05 for 3-months FU assessments.

d

data of relevant subsample was provided from authors upon request.

e

FU-assessment conducted at 2-months, not 3-months, post intervention (no later FU-assessment available).

f

Alcohol Use Disorder Scale; ad-hoc developed scale; only limited information available about it, therefore categorized in “other outcomes”.

g

FU-assessment conducted at 2-weeks not 3-months, post intervention (no later FU-assessment available).

“—”indicates that effect size was not calculable.

Negative effect sizes indicate superiority of the comparison group over the respective experimental group on this particular measure.

Hedge’s gav (within-condition effect sizes) uses the average standard deviation of both repeated measures as a standardizer.

Hedge’s gs (between-condition effect sizes) uses the pooled standard deviation of both independent measures as a standardizer.

ASSIST-SSIS, ASSIST-Specific Substance Involvement Scores; AUDIT, Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test; AUDS, Alcohol use disorder scale (ad-hoc developed scale); CG, Control Group; RH, reproductive health; TG, Treatment Group.