Can Simply Answering Research Questions Change Behaviour? Systematic Review and Meta Analyses of Brief Alcohol Intervention Trials

被引:192
作者
McCambridge, Jim [1 ]
Kypri, Kypros [2 ]
机构
[1] London Sch Hyg & Trop Med, Ctr Res Drugs & Hlth Behav, Dept Publ Hlth & Policy, London WC1, England
[2] Univ Newcastle, Sch Med & Publ Hlth, Ctr Clin Epidemiol & Biostat, Newcastle, NSW 2300, Australia
来源
PLOS ONE | 2011年 / 6卷 / 10期
基金
英国惠康基金;
关键词
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIAL; ASKING QUESTIONS; RISK; REACTIVITY; IMPACT; BIAS; PREFERENCES; UNITS;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0023748
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Background: Participant reports of their own behaviour are critical for the provision and evaluation of behavioural interventions. Recent developments in brief alcohol intervention trials provide an opportunity to evaluate longstanding concerns that answering questions on behaviour as part of research assessments may inadvertently influence it and produce bias. The study objective was to evaluate the size and nature of effects observed in randomized manipulations of the effects of answering questions on drinking behaviour in brief intervention trials. Methodology/Principal Findings: Multiple methods were used to identify primary studies. Between-group differences in total weekly alcohol consumption, quantity per drinking day and AUDIT scores were evaluated in random effects meta-analyses. Ten trials were included in this review, of which two did not provide findings for quantitative study, in which three outcomes were evaluated. Between-group differences were of the magnitude of 13.7 (-0.17 to 27.6) grams of alcohol per week (approximately 1.5 U. K. units or 1 standard U. S. drink) and 1 point (0.1 to 1.9) in AUDIT score. There was no difference in quantity per drinking day. Conclusions/Significance: Answering questions on drinking in brief intervention trials appears to alter subsequent self-reported behaviour. This potentially generates bias by exposing non-intervention control groups to an integral component of the intervention. The effects of brief alcohol interventions may thus have been consistently under-estimated. These findings are relevant to evaluations of any interventions to alter behaviours which involve participant self-report.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 56 条
[1]   Review of randomised trials using the post-randomised consent (Zelen's) design [J].
Adamson, Joy ;
Cockayne, Sarah ;
Puffer, Suezann ;
Torgerson, David J. .
CONTEMPORARY CLINICAL TRIALS, 2006, 27 (04) :305-319
[2]  
[Anonymous], PROJECT IDENTIFICATI
[3]  
[Anonymous], BRIT J ADDICTION
[4]  
[Anonymous], PLOS ONE IN PRESS
[5]  
[Anonymous], 1979, Quasi-experimentation: Design analysis issues for field settings
[6]  
[Anonymous], PROJECT IDENTIFICATI
[7]  
Babor T.F., 2001, The alcohol use identification test: Guidelines for use in primary care, V2nd
[8]   Cues of being watched enhance cooperation in a real-world setting [J].
Bateson, Melissa ;
Nettle, Daniel ;
Roberts, Gilbert .
BIOLOGY LETTERS, 2006, 2 (03) :412-414
[9]   Mechanisms of change in control group drinking in clinical trials of brief alcohol intervention: Implications for bias toward the null [J].
Bernstein, Judith A. ;
Bernstein, Edward ;
Heeren, Timothy C. .
DRUG AND ALCOHOL REVIEW, 2010, 29 (05) :498-507
[10]   Nonspecific effects in longitudinal studies: Impact on quality of life measures [J].
Bouchet, C ;
Guillemin, F ;
Briancon, S .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1996, 49 (01) :15-20