IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0044120.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Personalised Normative Feedback for Preventing Alcohol Misuse in University Students: Solomon Three-Group Randomised Controlled Trial

Author

Listed:
  • Maria T Moreira
  • Reza Oskrochi
  • David R Foxcroft

Abstract

Background: Young people tend to over-estimate peer group drinking levels. Personalised normative feedback (PNF) aims to correct this misperception by providing information about personal drinking levels and patterns compared with norms in similar aged peer groups. PNF is intended to raise motivation for behaviour change and has been highlighted for alcohol misuse prevention by the British Government Behavioural Insight Team. The objective of the trial was to assess the effectiveness of PNF with college students for the prevention of alcohol misuse. Methodology: Solomon three-group randomised controlled trial. 1751 students, from 22 British Universities, allocated to a PNF group, a normal control group, or a delayed measurement control group to allow assessment of any measurement effects. PNF was provided by email. Participants completed online questionnaires at baseline, 6- and 12-months (only 12-months for the delayed measurement controls). Drinking behaviour measures were (i) alcohol disorders; (ii) frequency; (iii) typical quantity, (iv) weekly consumption; (v) alcohol-related problems; (vi) perceived drinking norms; and (vii) positive alcohol expectancies. Analyses focused on high-risk drinkers, as well as all students, because of research evidence for the prevention paradox in student drinkers. Principal Findings: Follow-up rates were low, with only 50% and 40% responding at 6- and 12-months, respectively, though comparable to similar European studies. We found no evidence for any systematic attrition bias. Overall, statistical analyses with the high risk sub-sample, and for all students, showed no significant effects of the intervention, at either time-point, in a completed case analysis and a multiple imputation analysis. Conclusions: We found no evidence for the effectiveness of PNF for the prevention of alcohol misuse and alcohol-related problems in a UK student population. Registration: Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN30784467

Suggested Citation

  • Maria T Moreira & Reza Oskrochi & David R Foxcroft, 2012. "Personalised Normative Feedback for Preventing Alcohol Misuse in University Students: Solomon Three-Group Randomised Controlled Trial," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(9), pages 1-10, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0044120
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0044120
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0044120
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0044120&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0044120?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jim McCambridge & Kypros Kypri, 2011. "Can Simply Answering Research Questions Change Behaviour? Systematic Review and Meta Analyses of Brief Alcohol Intervention Trials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(10), pages 1-9, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kenneth Lowande & Andrew Proctor, 2020. "Bureaucratic Responsiveness to LGBT Americans," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(3), pages 664-681, July.
    2. Jim McCambridge & Marijn de Bruin & John Witton, 2012. "The Effects of Demand Characteristics on Research Participant Behaviours in Non-Laboratory Settings: A Systematic Review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(6), pages 1-6, June.
    3. Supa Pengpid & Karl Peltzer & Hendry Van der Heever & Linda Skaal, 2013. "Screening and Brief Interventions for Hazardous and Harmful Alcohol Use among University Students in South Africa: Results from a Randomized Controlled Trial," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-15, May.
    4. Jim McCambridge & Kaanan Butor-Bhavsar & John Witton & Diana Elbourne, 2011. "Can Research Assessments Themselves Cause Bias in Behaviour Change Trials? A Systematic Review of Evidence from Solomon 4-Group Studies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(10), pages 1-9, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0044120. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.