Aim: To assess the effectiveness of two personalized digital interventions (OneTooMany and Drinks Meter) compared to controls.
Method: Randomized controlled trial (AEARCTR-0,001,082). Volunteers for the study, aged 18–30, were randomly allocated to one of two interventions or one of two control groups and were followed up 4 weeks later. Primary outcomes were AUDIT-C, drinking harms and pre-loading. Drinks Meter provided participants with brief screening and advice for alcohol in addition to normative feedback, information on calories consumed and money spent. OneTooMany presented a series of socially embarrassing scenarios that may occur when drinking, and participants were scored according to if/how recently they had been experienced.
Results: The study failed to recruit and obtain sufficient follow-up data to reach a prior estimated power for detecting a difference between groups and there was no indication in the analysable sample of 402 subjects of a difference on the primary outcome measures (Drinks Meter; AUDIT-C IRR = 0.98 (0.89–1.09); Pre-loading IRR = 1.01 (0.95–1.07); Harms IRR = 0.97 (0.79–1.20); OneTooMany; AUDIT-C IRR = 0.96 (0.86–1.07); Pre-loading IRR = 0.99 (0.93–1.06); Harms IRR = 1.16 (0.94–1.43).
Conclusion: Further research is needed on the efficacy of such instruments and their ingredients. However, recruitment and follow-up are a challenge.
Winstock, ARFoxcroft, DR
Faculty of Health and Life Sciences\Department of Psychology, Social Work and Public Health
Year of publication: 2017Date of RADAR deposit: 2017-07-17