Cited by 65Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesDigital Mental Health InterventionsAlcohol Consumption and Health Effects

Formative evaluation and three-month follow-up of an online personalized assessment feedback intervention for problem drinkers

Open access
Cunningham, John A, Humphreys, Keith, Kypri, Kypros, van Mierlo, Trevor·2006·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In recent years, online services for problem drinkers have been developed. This paper describes ongoing efforts to improve one of these services, the Alcohol Help Center. OBJECTIVE: This report summarizes new modules added to the Check Your Drinking (CYD) screener, a component of the Alcohol Help Center, to make the CYD screener more useful to periodic heavy drinkers, as well as to regular alcohol consumers. Participants' initial reactions to the CYD screener and the changes in their drinking habits at a three-month follow-up are presented. METHODS: The CYD screener provides a free personalized Final Report that compares the user's drinking to that of others in the general population of the same age, gender, and country of origin. Current alcohol consumption and demographic characteristics are collected as part of the CYD screening process. After users were presented with a customized Final Report, they were hot-linked to a volunteer feedback survey. The voluntary feedback survey asked about impressions of the CYD Final Report. Respondents agreeing to participate were sent a follow-up survey after three months. RESULTS: We recruited 388 volunteers (69% female) who were registered users of another free-to-consumer online eHealth service. Of the 343 respondents agreeing to participate in the three-month follow-up, 138 accessed the survey, and 97 provided complete data (participation rate = 40%; completion rate = 70%). Compared to moderate drinkers, current problem drinkers judged the Final Report to be more useful (34% vs. 69%, chi2 (1) = 41.5, P < .001) and accurate (43% vs. 76%, chi2 (1) = 36.0, P < .001). Respondents who participated in the three-month follow-up displayed reductions in drinking compared to baseline (F(4,76) = 12.2, P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: Improvements can still be made to make the CYD screener more relevant to specific populations, particularly periodic heavy drinkers. There is a need to further tailor algorithms that can present questions only relevant to specific populations. There also appears to be a need to further customize the Final Report for respondents who identify themselves as infrequent heavy drinkers. These improvements will be made, and a randomized controlled trial is planned to conduct a rigorous evaluation of the CYD screener as an intervention to help problem drinkers.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/jmir.8.2.e5

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Personalized feedback interventions for the most part do not target a specific clientele, as they include non-consumers with high-risk consumers, with the goal to keep consumption within recommended limits.

    “For the most part, these interventions do not target a specific clientele, as they include non-consumers with high-risk consumers (for example, Cunningham et al., 2006; Doumas and Andersen, 2009; Bewick et al., 2010; Labrie et al., 2013), with the goal to keep their consumption within recommended limits.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [8]8. Roizen R, Cahalan D, Shanks P. "Spontaneous remission" among untreated problem drinkers. In: Kandel DB, editor. Longitudinal research on drug use: empirical findings and methodological issues. Washington, DC: Hemisphere; 1978. pp. 197–221.
  2. [28]28. Babor TF, De La Fuente MF, Saunders JB, Grant M. AUDIT - The alcohol use disorders identification test: guidelines for use in primary health care. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 1989.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cunningham, J. A., Humphreys, K., Kypri, K., & van Mierlo, T.
Affiliations
  • Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CA)
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
Cunningham, John A
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2006-04-12
Volume
8
Issue
2
Pages
e5
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2054457764
Cited by
65
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 7
FWCI
3.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • TSpace (University of Toronto) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Alcohol Consumption and Health Effects
Keywords
problem drinking, personalized feedback, digital health interventions, drinking behavior change, formative assessment
MeSH terms
Adult, Alcoholism, Feedback, Female, Health Services, Health Surveys, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Self Care, Time Factors, Treatment Outcome, Internet

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