Cited by 19Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesDigital Mental Health InterventionsTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation

Characteristics of problem drinkers in e-therapy versus face-to-face treatment

Open access
Postel, Marloes G., de Haan, Hein A., ter Huurne, Elke D., Becker, Eni S., de Jong, Cor A. J.·2011·The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The availability of online treatment programs offers the potential to reach more problem drinkers. This study compared the client populations of an e-therapy program (asynchronous client-therapist communication via the Internet) and a face-to-face treatment program. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether e-therapy and face-to-face groups differed from each other and changed over time. METHODS: We compared the baseline characteristics of four naturalistic groups (N = 4593): two e-therapy groups (2005-2006 and 2008-2009) and two consecutive series of ambulant face-to-face clients admitted for treatment as usual. The characteristics we were interested in were gender, age, education level, working situation, and earlier treatment for drinking problems. RESULTS: The results showed that the baseline characteristics of e-therapy and face-to-face clients differed by gender, education level, work situation, prior alcohol treatment, and age. We also found that both e-therapy groups differed over time by gender, work situation, and prior alcohol treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The e-therapy program successfully attracted clients who were different from those who were represented in regular face-to-face alcohol treatment services. This indicates that e-therapy decreases the barriers to treatment facilities and enhances the accessibility. However, the e-therapy population changed over time. Although the e-therapy program still reached an important new group of clients in 2008-2009, this group showed more overlap with the traditional face-to-face group of clients probably as a result of improved acceptance of e-therapy in the general population. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: Although e-therapy seems to be better accepted in the general population, anonymous treatment seems necessary to reach a broader range of 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 · 10.3109/00952990.2011.600388

Cites

27 of 27 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?

  • Alcohol users who registered for an online treatment were in greater proportion women, older, more educated, and more likely to be employed and seek treatment for the first time, as compared to those who used a standard treatment.

    “Postel et al. (2011) observed that alcohol users who registered for an online treatment were in greater proportion women, older, more educated, and more likely to be employed and seek treatment for the first time, as compared to those who used a standard treatment.”
  • The profile of participants appears similar to that drawn by Postel et al. (2011).

    “This profile appears similar to that drawn by Postel et al. (2011).”
  • Reasons for dropout from Web-based interventions relate to dissatisfaction with the intervention, mismatch of goals of the intervention and those of the users, and low flexibility to adjust to different situations and user characteristics.

    “Research on nonadherence indicates that reasons for dropout relate to dissatisfaction with the intervention, mismatch of goals of the intervention and those of the users, and low flexibility to adjust to different situations and user characteristics [15,22,23].”

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: 1

  1. Miller WR, Rollnick S. Motivational Interviewing: Preparing People to Change. New York: The Guilford Press, 2002.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Postel, M. G., de Haan, H. A., ter Huurne, E. D., Becker, E. S., & de Jong, C. A. J.
Affiliations
  • Nijmegen Institute for Scientist Practitioners in Addiction (NL)
  • Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
Corresponding author
Postel, Marloes G.
Venue
The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse
Published
2011-07-29
Volume
37
Issue
6
Pages
537-542
ISSN
  • 0095-2990 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-9891
OpenAlex
W2150206413
Cited by
19
References
27
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Keywords
e-therapy, problem drinkers, alcoholism, face-to-face treatment, client characteristics, treatment accessibility, barriers to treatment, gender differences
MeSH terms
Adult, Age Factors, Alcoholism, Educational Status, Female, Health Services Accessibility, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Netherlands, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Sex Factors, Time Factors, 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