‘Asking’ but Not ‘Screening’: Assessing Physicians’ and Nurses’ Substance-Related Clinical Behaviors
Abstract
Background Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) is a promising public health approach for problematic substance use. A core component of SBIRT is the use of formal screening tools to categorize a patient's likely level of risk in order to provide an appropriately-matched service. Training in formal screening is included in many SBIRT training programs, but infrequently is emphasized. Objectives To assess pre-training levels of SBIRT-related clinical behaviors, including screening, this study examined a secondary dataset collected from internal medicine residents and graduate nurse practitioner students. Methods Learners (n = 117) completed 13 self-report items assessing use of SBIRT-related behaviors. Researchers used exploratory factor analysis to identify underlying concepts in the questionnaire, then used mixed ANOVA to compare mean frequency of utilization of each factor (asking, screening, and intervening) by academic program. Results Learners reported asking about substance use frequently, intervening some of the time, and infrequently using formal screening tools. Interaction and between-academic-program effects were significant but small. Conclusions Prior to SBIRT training, most clinical practitioners reported asking patients about substance use, but few reported regularly using formal substance use screening tools. This may have implications for the importance of SBIRT training as part of curricular work, and for the internal content foci…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Brief screening questionnaires are feasible, but implementation rates in primary care are largely disappointing.
“Ample evidence suggests that use of brief screening questionnaires is feasible; however, general implementation rates in frontline healthcare settings like primary care are largely disappointing (Mertens et al., 2015; Agley et al., 2018; Thoele et al., 2021).”
From Dental screening, counseling, and referral to treatment for substance use disorder: Survey of the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network (2026) · cites this paper as Agley et al., 2018
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 1 · Cited by 24
- Authors
- Agley, J., Carlson, J. M., McNelis, A. M., Gassman, R. A., Schwindt, R., Crabb, D., & Vannerson, J.
- Affiliations
- Indiana University Bloomington (US)
- Indiana University Indianapolis (US)
- George Washington University (US)
- Indiana University School of Medicine (US)
- Corresponding author
- Agley, Jon
- Venue
- Substance Use & Misuse
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2018-02-15
- Volume
- 53
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1834-1839
- ISSN
- 1082-6084 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-2491
- OpenAlex
- W2793564760
- Cited by
- 24
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 2.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Substance Use & Misuse (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA TI025375)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
- Keywords
- SBIRT, substance use screening, clinical behavior, internal medicine residents, nurse practitioner students, intervention, academic program differences, medical curriculum
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Internal Medicine, Internship and Residency, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Referral and Consultation, Students, Nursing, Substance-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