Quality of Research
Documents Reviewed
The documents below were reviewed for Quality of Research. The research point of
contact can provide information regarding the studies reviewed and the availability
of additional materials, including those from more recent studies that may have been conducted.
Study 1Werch, C. E., Carlson, J. M., Owen, D. M., DiClemente, C. C., & Carbonari, J. P. (2001). Effects of a stage-based alcohol preventive intervention for inner-city youth. Journal of Drug Education, 31(2), 123-138. 
Werch, C. E., Owen, D. M., Carlson, J. M., DiClemente, C. C., Edgemon, P., & Moore, M. (2003). One-year follow-up results of the STARS for Families alcohol prevention program. Health Education Research, 18(1), 74-87.
Werch, C. E., Pappas, D. M., Carlson, J. M., Edgemon, P., Sinder, J. A., & DiClemente, C. C. (2000). Evaluation of a brief alcohol prevention program for urban school youth. American Journal of Health Behavior, 24(2), 120-131. Study 2Werch, C. E., Pappas, D. M., Carlson, J. M., & DiClemente, C. C. (1998). Short- and long-term effects of a pilot prevention program to reduce alcohol consumption. Substance Use and Misuse, 33(11), 2303-2321. Study 3Werch, C. E., Carlson, J. M., Pappas, D. M., Edgemon, P., & DiClemente, C. C. (2000). Effects of a brief alcohol preventive intervention for youth attending school sports physical examinations. Substance Use and Misuse, 35(3), 421-432. Study 4Werch, C. E., Anzalone, D. M., Brokiewicz, L. M., Felker, J., Carlson, J. M., & Castellon-Vogel, E. A. (1996). An intervention for preventing alcohol use among inner-city middle school students. Archives of Family Medicine, 5(3), 146-152. Study 5Werch, C. E., Carlson, J. M., Pappas, D. M., & DiClemente, C. C. (1996). Brief nurse consultations for preventing alcohol use among urban school youth. Journal of School Health, 66(9), 335-338.
Outcomes
| Outcome 1: Heavy alcohol use |
|
Description of Measures
|
The Youth Alcohol and Drug Survey was used to collect data on alcohol consumption. Heavy alcohol use was defined as consuming five or more drinks in a row during the past 2 weeks and past 30 days.
|
|
Key Findings
|
In one study, at the 3-month posttest, fewer intervention participants reported drinking heavily during the past 30 days than participants in the comparison group, who received alcohol education booklets to read independently (p < .05). In another study, at the 6-month posttest, fewer intervention participants reported drinking heavily during the past 30 days than participants in the no-treatment control group (p < .05). In a third study, from baseline to the 3-month posttest, heavy drinking decreased in the intervention group and increased in the no-treatment control group (p < .05).
|
|
Studies Measuring Outcome
|
Study 1, Study 3, Study 5
|
|
Study Designs
|
Experimental
|
|
Quality of Research Rating
|
2.9
(0.0-4.0 scale)
|
| Outcome 2: Quantity of alcohol use |
|
Description of Measures
|
A battery of standardized items was adopted from previous research on youth alcohol use prevention to assess the quantity of alcohol consumed during the past 30 days.
|
|
Key Findings
|
At the 10-week follow-up, intervention participants reported having consumed less alcohol than participants in the comparison group, who received alcohol education booklets to read independently (p < .05).
|
|
Studies Measuring Outcome
|
Study 4
|
|
Study Designs
|
Experimental
|
|
Quality of Research Rating
|
3.2
(0.0-4.0 scale)
|
| Outcome 3: Frequency of alcohol use |
|
Description of Measures
|
The Youth Alcohol and Drug Survey was used to collect data on the frequency of alcohol use during the past 7 days and past 30 days.
|
|
Key Findings
|
Three studies compared the intervention to a comparison condition in which participants received alcohol education booklets to read independently. In one study, at the 3-month posttest, fewer intervention participants reported drinking alcohol in the past 7 days (p < .05) and the past 30 days (p < .05) than participants in the comparison group. In another study, of participants who had already started using alcohol, those in the intervention group reported less frequent alcohol use at the 1-month posttest than those in the comparison group (p < .05). In a third study, at the 10-week follow-up, intervention participants reported significantly less frequent alcohol use over the past 30 days than comparison group participants (p < .05).
In another study, fewer participants in the intervention group than in the no-treatment control group reported at the 6-month posttest that they had consumed alcohol in the past 30 days (p < .05).
|
|
Studies Measuring Outcome
|
Study 1, Study 2, Study 3, Study 4
|
|
Study Designs
|
Experimental
|
|
Quality of Research Rating
|
3.3
(0.0-4.0 scale)
|
| Outcome 4: Stage of alcohol use initiation |
|
Description of Measures
|
The Youth Alcohol and Drug Survey was used to collect data on alcohol-related cognitive, social, and behavioral risk and protective factors. These data were used to assign participants to one of the five stages of alcohol use initiation: precontemplation, contemplation, preparation, action, and maintenance.
|
|
Key Findings
|
At the 3-month posttest, fewer intervention participants were in the advanced stages of alcohol use initiation (i.e., preparation, action, maintenance) than participants in the comparison group, who received alcohol education booklets to read independently (p < .05).
|
|
Studies Measuring Outcome
|
Study 1
|
|
Study Designs
|
Experimental
|
|
Quality of Research Rating
|
3.2
(0.0-4.0 scale)
|
| Outcome 5: Intentions to use alcohol in the future |
|
Description of Measures
|
The Youth Alcohol and Drug Survey was used to collect data on intentions to use alcohol in the future. Items measure intentions to drink in the next 6 months and intentions to think about using, plan to use, try to use, and use alcohol in the next year.
|
|
Key Findings
|
In one study, at the 3-month posttest, intervention participants reported having significantly fewer intentions to drink alcohol in the future than students in the comparison group, who received alcohol education booklets to read independently (p < .01). This finding remained significant at the 1-year follow-up (p < .01). In another study, at the 6-month posttest, fewer participants in the intervention group than in the no-treatment control group reported intentions to use alcohol in the next 6 months (p < .05).
|
|
Studies Measuring Outcome
|
Study 1, Study 3
|
|
Study Designs
|
Experimental
|
|
Quality of Research Rating
|
2.9
(0.0-4.0 scale)
|
Study Populations
The following populations were identified in the studies reviewed for Quality of
Research.
|
Study
|
Age
|
Gender
|
Race/Ethnicity
|
|
Study 1
|
13-17 (Adolescent)
|
50% Female
50% Male
|
85% Black or African American
12% White
3% Race/ethnicity unspecified
|
|
Study 2
|
13-17 (Adolescent)
|
50% Female
50% Male
|
85% Black or African American
12% White
3% Race/ethnicity unspecified
|
|
Study 3
|
13-17 (Adolescent)
|
51.7% Male
48.3% Female
|
74.7% White
13.5% Black or African American
11.8% Race/ethnicity unspecified
|
|
Study 4
|
13-17 (Adolescent)
|
56% Female
44% Male
|
88% Black or African American
10% White
2% Race/ethnicity unspecified
|
|
Study 5
|
13-17 (Adolescent)
|
59% Female
41% Male
|
84% Black or African American
13% White
3% Race/ethnicity unspecified
|
Quality of Research Ratings by Criteria (0.0-4.0 scale)
External reviewers independently evaluate the Quality of Research for an intervention's
reported results using six criteria:
For more information about these criteria and the meaning of the ratings, see Quality of Research.
|
Outcome
|
Reliability
of Measures
|
Validity
of Measures
|
Fidelity
|
Missing
Data/Attrition
|
Confounding
Variables
|
Data
Analysis
|
Overall
Rating
|
|
1: Heavy alcohol use
|
3.5
|
2.5
|
2.5
|
2.5
|
2.5
|
4.0
|
2.9
|
|
2: Quantity of alcohol use
|
3.5
|
3.0
|
2.5
|
2.5
|
3.5
|
4.0
|
3.2
|
|
3: Frequency of alcohol use
|
3.5
|
3.0
|
3.0
|
2.5
|
3.5
|
4.0
|
3.3
|
|
4: Stage of alcohol use initiation
|
3.5
|
3.0
|
2.5
|
2.5
|
3.5
|
4.0
|
3.2
|
|
5: Intentions to use alcohol in the future
|
3.5
|
2.5
|
3.0
|
2.5
|
2.5
|
3.5
|
2.9
|
Study Strengths The studies used randomized designs. The measures were reliable, and self-report measures of alcohol use were validated with saliva dipstick tests. The analyses were appropriate.
Study Weaknesses Some of the studies did not sufficiently address intervention fidelity. One of the instruments used did not have known psychometric properties. Some of the studies did not clearly explain whether the parents' involvement in the intervention was as intended. Contamination across treatment conditions was possible in some studies. In some cases, attrition was high and there were differences in baseline alcohol use between students who completed the program and those who did not.
|
|
