Cited by 433Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentCrime Patterns and Interventions

Longer‐term primary prevention for alcohol misuse in young people: a systematic review

Foxcroft, D. R., Ireland, D., Lister‐Sharp, D. J., Lowe, G., Breen, R.·2003·Addiction

Abstract

Objective To identify and summarize rigorous evaluations of psychosocial and educational interventions aimed at the primary prevention of alcohol misuse by young people aged up to 25 years, especially over the longer term (>3 years). Methods Cochrane Collaboration Systematic Review. Data sources A comprehensive search of 22 databases and recursive checking of bibliographies for randomized and non‐randomized controlled trials and interrupted time‐series studies. Main outcome measures Objective or self‐report measures of alcohol use and misuse. Results Fifty‐six studies were selected for inclusion in the systematic review. Twenty of the 56 studies showed evidence of ineffectiveness. No firm conclusions about the effectiveness of prevention interventions in the short‐ and medium term were possible. Over the longer term (>3 years), the Strengthening Families Programme (SFP) showed promise as an effective prevention intervention. The Number Needed to Treat (NNT) for the SFP over 4 years for three alcohol initiation behaviours (alcohol use, alcohol use without permission and first drunkenness) was 9 (for all three behaviours). One study also highlighted the potential value of culturally focused skills training over the longer‐term (NNT = 17 over 3.5 years for 4+ drinks in the last week) Conclusions (1) Research into important outcome variables needs to be undertaken; (2) the methodology of evaluations needs to be improved; (3) the SFP needs to be evaluated on a larger scale and in different settings; (4) culturally focused interventions require further development and rigorous evaluation; and (5) an international register of alcohol and drug misuse prevention interventions should be established and criteria agreed for rating prevention interventions in terms of safety, efficacy and effectiveness.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1360-0443.2003.00355.x

Cites

78 of 78 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
Foxcroft, D. R., Ireland, D., Lister‐Sharp, D. J., Lowe, G., & Breen, R.
Affiliations
Oxford Brookes University (GB)
Corresponding author
Foxcroft, D. R.
Venue
Addiction
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2003-03-25
Volume
98
Issue
4
Pages
397-411
ISSN
  • 0965-2140 (ISSN-L)
  • 1360-0443
OpenAlex
W2035546604
Cited by
433
References
75
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 33 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 25 · 2012: 32
FWCI
2.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Addiction (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Crime Patterns and Interventions
Keywords
alcoholism prevention, primary prevention, youth, psychosocial interventions, educational intervention, alcohol initiation, long-term effectiveness
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Alcohol Drinking, Alcoholic Intoxication, Child, Health Education, Humans, Program Evaluation, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Alcohol-Related Disorders

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