Search

Background While there is widespread consensus that sex- and gender-related factors are important for how interventions are designed, implemented, and evaluated, it is not currently known how alcohol treatment research accounts for sex characteristics and/or gender identities and modalities. This methodological systematic review documents and assesses how sex characteristics, gender identities, and gender modalities are operationalized in alcohol treatment intervention research involving youth. Methods and findings We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LGBT Life, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and grey literature from 2008 to 2023. We included articles that reported genders and/or sexes of participants 30 years of age and under and screened participants using AUDIT, AUDIT-C, or a structured interview using DSM-IV criteria. We limited the inclusion to studies that enrolled participants in alcohol treatment interventions and used a quantitative study design. We provide a narrative overview of the findings. Of 8,019 studies screened for inclusion, 86 articles were included in the review. None of the studies defined, measured, and reported both sex and gender variables accurately. Only 2 studies reported including trans participants. Most of the studies used gender or sex measures as a covariate to control for the effects of sex or gender on the intervention but did not discuss the rationale for or implications of this procedure. Conclusions Our findings identify that the majority of alcohol treatment intervention research with youth conflate sex and gender factors, including terminologically, conceptually, and methodologically. Based on these findings, we recommend future research in this area define and account for a spectrum of gender modalities, identities, and/or sex characteristics throughout the research life cycle, including during study design, data collection, data analysis, and reporting. It is also imperative that sex and gender variables are used expansively to ensure that intersex and trans youth are meaningfully integrated. Trial registration Registration: PROSPERO, registration number: CRD42019119408, Author(s): A.J. Lowik 1,2, Caroline Mniszak 1,3, Michelle Pang 1, Kimia Ziafat 1,3, Mohammad Karamouzian 4, Rod Knight 1,5,6,* Introduction While there is widespread consensus that sex- and gender-based factors [...]

Heavy drinking remains prevalent and problematic on college campuses. 'Open-Label Placebos' (OLPs) have gained recent attention as interventions for various disorders. The current aim was to carry out two feasibility studies of OLP interventions for college students. In Study 1, of-age students readily consumed the fake alcohol, and experienced slight beneficial effects (N=26). In Study 2, our enhanced OLP intervention for underage students backfired; we increased, rather than decreased, their intentions to drink real alcohol (N=83). The underage students most commonly reported wanting alcohol to ease social discomfort, and perhaps felt that the OLP left their wishes unanswered. Overall, the results suggest that OLP research should be approached with caution. Filtered prompts and behavioral experiments might re-direct and strengthen outcomes. Keywords: alcohol, open-label placebo, college, Heavy drinking has continued to be prevalent and problematic on college campuses for at least forty years (Schulenberg, Patrick, Johnston, O'Malley, Bacnman & Miech, 2021). Far from a benign rite [...]

Implementation intention formation, which involves identifying triggers and linking them with coping strategies, has proven effective at reducing alcohol consumption in general populations. For the first time, the present study tested the ability of implementation intentions to reduce alcohol consumption among heavy drinkers and to explore potential neuropsychological mechanisms. At baseline, participants were randomized to form implementation intentions or to an active control group. There was a 5.7 unit (1 unit = 10 ml or 8 g ethanol) per week reduction ([95%CI 0.15, 11.19], p = 0.048) in alcohol consumption at 1 month follow-up among participants who formed implementation intentions, which was significantly more than controls F(1, 91) = 3.95, p = 0.048, a medium effect size (d = 0.47, Cohen, 1992 (See CR53)). No significant differences in performance on the neuropsychological tasks were found between groups. The present study demonstrates for the first time that implementation intentions reduce alcohol consumption among heavy drinkers., Author(s): Elly McGrath [sup.1] [sup.3] , Rebecca Elliott [sup.1] , Tim Millar [sup.1] , Christopher J. Armitage [sup.2] Author Affiliations: (1) grid.5379.8, 0000000121662407, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University [...]

Background Uncertainty remains regarding the effectiveness of treatments for patients diagnosed with both an alcohol use disorder (AUD) and depressive disorder. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of clinical interventions for improving symptoms of adults with co-occurring AUDs and depressive disorders. Methods and findings We searched CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Excerpta Medica Database, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science from inception to December 2020. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating clinical interventions for adults with co-occurring AUDs and depressive disorders. Two independent reviewers extracted study-level information and outcome data. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, used frequentist random effects models for network meta-analyses, and rated our confidence in effect estimates using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Primary outcomes were remission from depression and alcohol use. Secondary outcomes were depressive symptoms, alcohol use, heavy drinking, health-related quality of life, functional status, and adverse events. We used standardized mean differences (SMDs) for continuous outcomes and odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous outcomes to estimate intervention effects. Overall, 36 RCTs with 2,729 participants evaluated 14 pharmacological and 4 psychological interventions adjunctive to treatment as usual (TAU). Studies were published from 1971 to 2019, conducted in 13 countries, and had a median sample size of 50 participants (range: 14 to 350 participants). We have very low confidence in all estimates of intervention effects on our primary outcomes (i.e., remission from depression and remission from alcohol use). We have moderate confidence that cognitive behavioral therapies (CBTs) demonstrated greater benefit than no additional treatment (SMD = -0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.05 to -0.63; p < 0.001) for depressive symptoms and low confidence (SMD = -0.25; 95% CI, -0.47 to -0.04; p = 0.021) for alcohol use. We have low confidence that tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) demonstrated greater benefit than placebo (SMD = -0.37; 95% CI, -0.72 to -0.02, p = 0.038) for depressive symptoms. Compared with placebo, we have moderate confidence that selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) demonstrated greater benefit for functional status (SMD = -0.92; 95% CI, -1.36 to -0.47, p < 0.001) and low confidence for alcohol use (SMD = -0.30; 95% CI, -0.59 to -0.02, p = 0.039). However, we have moderate confidence that patients receiving SSRIs also were more likely to experience an adverse event (OR = 2.20; 95% CI, 0.94 to 5.16, p = 0.07). We have very low confidence in all other effect estimates, and we did not have high confidence in any effect estimates. Limitations include the sparsity of evidence on intervention effects over the long term, risks of attrition bias, and heterogeneous definitions of adverse events in the evidence base. Conclusions We are very uncertain about the existence (or not) of any non-null effects for our primary outcomes of remission from depression and remission from alcohol use. The available evidence does suggest that CBTs likely reduced, and TCAs may have resulted in a slight reduction of depressive symptoms. SSRIs likely increased functional status, and SSRIs and CBTs may have resulted in a slight reduction of alcohol use. However, patients receiving SSRIs also likely had an increased risk of experiencing an adverse event. In addition, these conclusions only apply to postintervention and are not against active comparators, limiting the understanding of the efficacy of interventions in the long term as well as the comparative effectiveness of active treatments. As we did not have high confidence in any outcomes, additional studies are warranted to provide more conclusive evidence., Author(s): Sean Grant 1,2,*, Gulrez Azhar 2, Eugeniu Han 2, Marika Booth 2, Aneesa Motala 2, Jody Larkin 3, Susanne Hempel 2 Introduction Alcohol use disorders (AUDs) and depressive disorders [...]