Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Study flow diagram.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 1

Study flow diagram.

Methodological quality graph: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 2

Methodological quality graph: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item presented as percentages across all included studies.

Methodological quality summary: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item for each included study.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 3

Methodological quality summary: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item for each included study.

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 1 Mean alcohol consumption in grams per week: smaller values indicate better outcome.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 1 Mean alcohol consumption in grams per week: smaller values indicate better outcome.

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 2 Sensitivity analysis: Mean alcohol consumption in grams per week: smaller values indicate better outcome.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 2 Sensitivity analysis: Mean alcohol consumption in grams per week: smaller values indicate better outcome.

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 3 Mean alcohol consumption (change scores from baseline): smaller values indicate better outcome.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 3 Mean alcohol consumption (change scores from baseline): smaller values indicate better outcome.

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 4 Self reports of alcohol consumption (smaller values indicate better outcome).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 4 Self reports of alcohol consumption (smaller values indicate better outcome).

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 5 Laboratory markers (GammaGT): smaller values indicate better outcome.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 5 Laboratory markers (GammaGT): smaller values indicate better outcome.

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 6 Number of binges: smaller values indicate better outcome.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.6

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 6 Number of binges: smaller values indicate better outcome.

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 7 Heavy drinking episodes (days per week): smaller values indicate better outcome.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.7

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 7 Heavy drinking episodes (days per week): smaller values indicate better outcome.

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 8 Death: smaller values indicate better outcome.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.8

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 8 Death: smaller values indicate better outcome.

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 9 Sensitivity analysis: Death: smaller values indicate better outcome.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.9

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 9 Sensitivity analysis: Death: smaller values indicate better outcome.

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 10 Mean alcohol consumption in grams per week restricted to studies including only men: smaller values indicate better outcome.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.10

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 10 Mean alcohol consumption in grams per week restricted to studies including only men: smaller values indicate better outcome.

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 11 Driving offences within 3 years: smaller values indicate better outcome.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.11

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 11 Driving offences within 3 years: smaller values indicate better outcome.

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 12 Number of days hospitalised in previous 3 months: smaller values indicate better outcome.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.12

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 12 Number of days hospitalised in previous 3 months: smaller values indicate better outcome.

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 13 A&E visits in previous 3 months: smaller values indicate better outcome.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.13

Comparison 1 Brief interventions versus control, Outcome 13 A&E visits in previous 3 months: smaller values indicate better outcome.

Comparison 1. Brief interventions versus control

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Mean alcohol consumption in grams per week: smaller values indicate better outcome Show forest plot

8

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

1.1 4 month follow up

1

511

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐16.32 [‐180.89, 148.25]

1.2 6 month follow up

4

453

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐69.43 [‐128.14, ‐10.72]

1.3 9 month follow up

1

479

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐182.88 [‐360.00, ‐5.76]

1.4 1 year follow up

4

1073

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐33.62 [‐82.27, 15.03]

2 Sensitivity analysis: Mean alcohol consumption in grams per week: smaller values indicate better outcome Show forest plot

7

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

2.1 6 month follow up

3

364

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐55.49 [‐115.33, 4.35]

2.2 1 year follow up

4

997

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐36.31 [‐86.64, 14.01]

3 Mean alcohol consumption (change scores from baseline): smaller values indicate better outcome Show forest plot

3

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

3.1 6 month follow up

2

687

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.26 [‐0.73, 0.21]

3.2 1 year follow up

2

696

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.08 [‐0.41, 0.24]

4 Self reports of alcohol consumption (smaller values indicate better outcome) Show forest plot

3

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

4.1 3 month follow up

1

27

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.14 [‐0.90, 0.61]

4.2 6 month follow up

2

405

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.04 [‐0.24, 0.15]

4.3 1 year follow up

1

275

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.26 [‐0.50, ‐0.03]

5 Laboratory markers (GammaGT): smaller values indicate better outcome Show forest plot

3

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

5.1 6 month follow up

1

89

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

7.0 [‐33.77, 47.77]

5.2 1 year follow up

2

160

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐5.05 [‐36.82, 26.73]

6 Number of binges: smaller values indicate better outcome Show forest plot

1

287

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.99 [0.83, 1.19]

7 Heavy drinking episodes (days per week): smaller values indicate better outcome Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

7.1 4 months follow up

1

511

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.56 [‐1.02, ‐0.10]

7.2 9 months follow up

1

479

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.78 [‐1.32, ‐0.24]

7.3 12 months follow up

1

473

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.71 [‐1.26, ‐0.16]

8 Death: smaller values indicate better outcome Show forest plot

9

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

8.1 3 month follow up

1

27

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.08 [0.07, 15.50]

8.2 4 month follow up

1

520

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.36 [0.07, 1.86]

8.3 6 month follow up

4

1166

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.42 [0.19, 0.94]

8.4 9 month follow up

1

495

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.89 [0.34, 2.33]

8.5 1 year follow up

7

2396

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.60 [0.40, 0.91]

9 Sensitivity analysis: Death: smaller values indicate better outcome Show forest plot

7

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

9.1 1 year follow up

7

2275

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.61 [0.39, 0.96]

10 Mean alcohol consumption in grams per week restricted to studies including only men: smaller values indicate better outcome Show forest plot

4

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

10.1 4 month follow up

1

511

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐16.32 [‐180.89, 148.25]

10.2 6 month follow up

2

169

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐201.73 [‐586.96, 183.50]

10.3 9 month follow up

1

479

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐182.88 [‐360.00, ‐5.76]

10.4 1 year follow up

2

606

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐51.52 [‐144.25, 41.20]

11 Driving offences within 3 years: smaller values indicate better outcome Show forest plot

1

126

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.52 [0.22, 1.19]

12 Number of days hospitalised in previous 3 months: smaller values indicate better outcome Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

12.1 4 months follow up

1

511

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.41 [‐0.46, 1.28]

12.2 9 months follow up

1

479

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.73 [‐0.23, 1.69]

12.3 12 months follow up

1

473

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.56 [‐0.39, 1.51]

13 A&E visits in previous 3 months: smaller values indicate better outcome Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

13.1 4 months follow up

1

511

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.03 [‐0.03, 0.09]

13.2 9 months follow up

1

479

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.06 [‐0.00, 0.12]

13.3 12 months follow up

1

473

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.05 [‐0.01, 0.11]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. Brief interventions versus control