Cited by 52Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesDigital Mental Health InterventionsSmoking Behavior and Cessation

Feasibility of an email-based electronic screening and brief intervention (e-SBI) to college students in Sweden

Bendtsen, Preben, Johansson, Kjell, Åkerlind, Ingemar·2006·Addictive Behaviors

Abstract

An email-based electronic screening and brief intervention (e-SBI) with personalized normative feedback on alcohol habits was offered to all 3,875 second term students at Linköping University, Sweden. The students received an email with a link to a computerized alcohol habit test and were offered personalized feedback directly on the computer screen. The students evaluated the test and were asked to state whether they were going to consider changing or actually change their alcohol habits. The response rate was 44%, with 742 female and 843 male students participating. The students displayed a strong gender difference in drinking pattern. A three-fold higher percentage of males than females were risky drinkers with regard to a high average weekly volume consumption. The gender differences were less pronounced regarding heavy episodic drinking that was reported by 51% of the females and 70.5% of the males. The email-based computerized normative feedback was appreciated by the students and one-third of the females and one-fifth of the males believed that they would benefit from the normative feedback; 8% of the females and 3% of the males believed that they would actually change their habits after the feedback. Students with a risky drinking pattern, previous experiences of blackouts, being dissatisfied with their current drinking and students that had considered to change their habits before the e-SBI, yielded a stronger motivation to change their drinking after having performed the intervention compared to students without such characteristics. The e-SBI with normative feedback was simple to administer and has the potential to be used repeatedly and on a large scale with minimum effort in terms of cost and time.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.addbeh.2005.06.002

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bendtsen, P., Johansson, K., & Åkerlind, I.
Affiliations
Linköping University (SE)
Corresponding author
Bendtsen, Preben
Venue
Addictive Behaviors
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-05
Volume
31
Issue
5
Pages
777-787
ISSN
0306-4603 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2081325275
Cited by
52
References
20
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 7
FWCI
1.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Addictive Behaviors (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
Keywords
alcohol consumption, university students, personalized normative feedback, hazardous drinking, binge drinking, gender differences in drinking, alcohol blackouts, feasibility
MeSH terms
Adult, Alcohol Drinking, Cross-Sectional Studies, Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted, Feasibility Studies, Female, Humans, Male, Mass Screening, Motivation, Personal Satisfaction, Students, Therapy, Computer-Assisted, Universities, Feedback, Psychological, Electronic Mail

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review