↓ Skip to main content

A cross sectional evaluation of an alcohol intervention targeting young university students

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
94 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A cross sectional evaluation of an alcohol intervention targeting young university students
Published in
BMC Public Health, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3314-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sharyn Burns, Jonine Jancey, Gemma Crawford, Jonathan Hallett, Linda Portsmouth, Janelle Longo

Abstract

Hazardous drinking has been found to be higher among young university students compared to their non-university peers. Although young university students are exposed to new and exciting experiences, including greater availability and emphasis on social functions involving alcohol there are few multi strategy comprehensive interventions aimed at reducing alcohol-related harms. Random cross sectional online surveys were administered to 18-24 year old students studying at the main campus of a large metropolitan university in Perth, Western Australia. Prior to the completion of the second survey an alcohol intervention was implemented on campus. Completed surveys were received from 2465 (Baseline; T1) and 2422 (Post Year 1: T2) students. Students who consumed alcohol in the past 12 months were categorised as low risk or hazardous drinkers using the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT). Due to the cross sectional nature of the two samples two-tailed two-proportion z-test and two sample t-tests were employed to determine statistical significance between the two time periods for categorical and continuous variables respectively. At T1 and T2 89.1 % and 87.2 % of the total sample reported drinking alcohol in the past month respectively. Hazardous levels of alcohol consumption reduced slightly between T1 (39.7 %) and T2 (38 %). In both time periods hazardous drinkers reported significantly higher mean scores for experienced harm, second-hand harm and witnessed harm scores compared to low risk drinkers (p <0.001). Hazardous drinkers were significantly more likely to experience academic problems due to their alcohol consumption and to report more positive alcohol expectations than low risk drinkers at both time periods (p <0.001). Harms and problems for students who report hazardous drinking are of concern and efforts should be made to ensure integrated and targeted strategies reach higher risk students and focus on specific issues such as driving while intoxicated and alcohol related unplanned sexual activity. However there is also a need for universal strategies targeting all students and low risk drinkers as they too are exposed to alcohol harms within the drinking and social environment. Changing the culture of the university environment is a long term aim and to effect change a sustained combination of organisational actions, partnerships and educational actions is required.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 94 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 16%
Student > Master 12 13%
Researcher 10 11%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 33 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 15 16%
Psychology 11 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 12%
Social Sciences 7 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 4%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 38 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 May 2018.
All research outputs
#3,816,469
of 22,958,253 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#4,246
of 14,960 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,806
of 364,290 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#120
of 354 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,958,253 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,960 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 364,290 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 354 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.