Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2022 Jun 1.
Published in final edited form as: Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev. 2021 Nov 3;25(2):339–355. doi: 10.1007/s10567-021-00372-2

Table 1.

Included study characteristics

Study
Authors
& Year		 Int.
sample
size
(N)		 Control
sample
size
(N)		 Mean
age
(years)		 % Racial
or ethnic
minority		 % Male
assigned
sex		 Primary
target		 Clinical
problems
assessed		 Sample
type		 Control
group		 Int. setting Study
follow-up
periods		 Delivery
format		 Int. provider Length
of int.
(minutes)		 Length
of int.
(number
of
sessions)		 Length of
int. (number
of days)		 Reg.
status		 Number
of
outcomes
assessed		 Int. Description
Murphy et al., (2019) 255 138 18.77 14.80% 39% Substance use Anxiety, depression, substance use Community TAU Outpatient Clinic 1 month; 6 months; 12 months; 16 months Individual therapy (phone-based follow-up) Trainee clinicians (graduate students) 110–115 3 unknown yes 2 Substance Use, 2 Mental Health Brief alcohol intervention + substance free activity (BAI + SFAS)
Brief alcohol intervention + relaxation training (BAI + RT)
Deady et al., (2016) 60 44 21.74 unknown 40.4% Depression & substance use Depression, substance use Community Active Comparator Online 5 weeks; 3 months; 6 months Self-administered digital/online therapy Self-administered 240 4 28–70 (designed for four week use; available for ten) yes 2 Substance Use, 1 Mental Health CBT/MI-based online modularized intervention
O'Leary-Barrett et al., (2016) 694 516 13.7 57.40% 54% Substance use Anxiety, depression, substance use Community TAU School 6 months; 12 months; 18 months; 24 months Group therapy School staff 180 2 unknown yes 4 Substance Use, 2 Mental Health Personality targeted intervention
Sterling et al., (2019) 1255 616 15.83 74.74% 44.91% Mental health & substance use Anxiety, depression, substance Use Community TAU Primary Care 1 year; 3 years Individual therapy Primary care physicians and behavioral health providers < 15 or 60 1 1 (designed) no 1 Substance Use, 1 Mental Health Intervention for mental health symptoms and substance use
Andersson et al., (2017) 37 36 17.9 unknown 64% Substance use Anxiety, depression, substance use Outpatient TAU Telephone 2× weekly over 3 months Digital/online therapy Self-administered 60.5 24 84 (designed) yes 3 Substance Use, 2 Mental Health Phone-delivered brief personalized feedback
Brown et al., (2015) 79 72 15.8 11.60% 35.1% Substance use Anxiety, depression, substance use Inpatient TAU Inpatient clinic 1 month; 6 month; 12 months Individual therapy Doctoral-level psychologists, MA-level clinicians, post-doctoral students 90 2 7 (avg. completed) no 3 Substance Use, 2 Mental Health Motivational interviewing
Study Authors & Year Intervention
description		 Comparison
condition
for calculations		 Mental
health
outcome
measures		 Independently calculated
effect sizes for mental
health outcomes
 Significant
author-reported
main
effect?		 Substance
use
outcome
measures		 Independently calculated
effect sizes for substance
use outcomes
 Significant
author-reported
main
effect?		 Any positive, significant
effect on mental
health
 Any positive,
significant effect on
substance use
First
follow-up		 Second
follow-up		 First
Follow-up		 Second
Follow-up		 Independent
calculations		 Author-reported Independent
calculations		 Author-reported
Murphy et al., (2019) Brief alcohol intervention + substance free activity (BAI + SFAS) TAU (1) DASS (anxiety) − 0.302* − 0.2374* Yes§ (1) Daily Drinking Questionnaire − 0.3633* − 0.225 Yes§ Yes Yes Yes Yes
(2) DASS (depression) − 0.1 − 0.3089* No§ (2) Young Adult Alcohol Consequences − 0.5245* − 0.2068 Yes§
Brief alcohol intervention + relaxation training (BAI + RT) TAU (1) DASS (anxiety) − 0.0246 − 0.2374 Yes§ (1) Daily Drinking Questionnaire − 0.622* − 0.2923* Yes§ No Yes Yes Yes
(2) DASS (depression) 0.0311 − 0.1464 No§ (2) Young Adult Alcohol Consequences − 0.5959* − 0.3431* Yes§
Deady et al., (2016) CBT/MI-based online modularized intervention Active Comparator (1) Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (depression) − 0.4571* − 0.1861 Yes† (1) TOTAL (drinks per week) − 0.9883* 0.0794 Yes† Yes Yes Yes Yes
(2) TOTAL (drinking days per week) − 0.7613* − 0.2395 Yes†
O'Leary-Barrett et al., (2016) Personality targeted intervention TAU (1) Brief Symptom Inventory (anxiety) Cannot calculate Cannot calculate Yes (1) Binge Drinking Onset Cannot calculate Cannot calculate Yes Unknown (unable to calculate with only regression coefficients) Yes Unknown (unable to calculate with only regression coefficients) Yes
(2) Problem Drinking Onset Cannot calculate Cannot calculate No
(2) Brief Symptom Inventory (depression) Cannot calculate Cannot calculate Yes (3) Binge Drinking Frequency Cannot calculate Cannot calculate No
(4) Rutgers Alcohol Problem Index (frequency) Cannot calculate Cannot calculate No
Sterling et al., (2019) Intervention for mental health symptoms and substance use TAU (1) Mental Health Diagnoses − 0.1869 − 0.0942 No (1) Substance Use Diagnoses − 0.0587 − 0.2908* Yes† No No Yes Yes
Andersson et al., (2017) Phone-delivered brief personalized feedback TAU (1) SCL-8D (anxiety) 0.5712* Yes§ (1) AHSS (alcohol use) − 0.0562 No§ Yes Yes No No
(2) SCL-8D (depression) 0.3746 No§ (2) AHSS (drug use) − 0.2201 No§
(3) Total Substance Use − 0.0187 No§
Brown et al., (2015) Motivational interviewing TAU (1) Youth Self Report (anxiety) −0.131 −0.0274 No (1) TLFB (time to first substance use after treatment) Cannot calculate Cannot calculate Yes No No Unknown (unable to calculate with only regression coefficients) Yes
(2) Youth Self Report (depression) 0.0096 0.044 No (2) TLFB (# of days of substance use per month) Cannot calculate Cannot calculate Yes†
(3) Adolescent Problem Use Scale Cannot calculate Cannot calculate No
Study Authors & Year Intervention description Authors’ results summary Summary of independent calculations
Murphy et al., (2019) Brief alcohol intervention + substance free activity (BMI + SFAS)
Brief alcohol intervention + relaxation training (BMI + RT)		 The BMI + SFAS condition was associated with lower anxiety levels, lower substance use, and less substance use consequences. The BMI + RT condition was associated with lower anxiety levels, lower substance use, and less substance use consequences. Neither condition was associated with reduced depression individually The BMI + SFAS condition was associated with lower anxiety levels at first and last follow-up, lower depression levels at last follow-up only, lower substance use at first follow-up only, and less substance use consequences at first follow-up only. The BMI + RT condition was associated with lower levels of substance use and substance use consequences at both first and last follow-up; no significant differences were found for depression or anxiety
Deady et al., (2016) CBT/MI-based online modularized intervention The intervention was associated with lower substance use, depression, and anxiety levels at first follow-up, but these differences lost significance by the last follow-up The intervention was associated with lower substance use, depression, and anxiety levels at first follow-up, but these differences lost significance by the last follow-up
O'Leary-Barrett et al., (2016) Personality targeted intervention The intervention was associated with a significant main effect on binge drinking onset, depression, and anxiety, but not on the remainder of the substance use outcomes. Significant indirect effects were found for binge drinking frequency, problem drinking onset, and problem drinking frequency Authors did not respond to requests for data needed to calculate effect sizes
Sterling et al., (2019) Intervention for mental health symptoms and substance use The intervention was associated with lower substance use diagnoses relative to the control group at last follow-up, but not at first follow-up (where there was trend-level significance). No significant, positive effect of the intervention on mental health diagnoses was found overall, but rates of depression diagnoses differed between groups at 3-year follow-up The intervention was associated with lower substance use diagnoses relative to the control group at last follow-up, but not at first follow-up (where there was trend-level significance). No significant, positive effect of the intervention on mental health diagnoses was found overall. Authors did not provide diagnosis-level data
Andersson et al., (2017) Phone-delivered brief personalized feedback The intervention was associated with a significant reduction in anxiety relative to the control group. No significant, positive effect of the intervention on depression or substance use was found The intervention was associated with a significant reduction in anxiety relative to the control group. No significant, positive effect of the intervention on depression or substance use was found
Brown et al., (2015) Motivational interviewing The intervention was associated with longer latency to first substance use and fewer days of substance use per month, though the significance of the latter outcome attenuated across follow-ups. The intervention was not associated with a significant difference in alcohol use consequences, depression levels, or anxiety levels No significant, positive effect of the intervention on mental health was found. Authors did not provide data needed to calculate effect sizes for substance use outcomes

Calculations were performed on group means and standard deviations unless otherwise indicated

Int. intervention, TAU treatment as usual

*

Significant effect sizes (i.e., do not include zero in the confidence interval)

†

Lack of consistent significance across follow-ups

§

Calculations performed on score by time interactions

Calculations performed on group frequencies