↓ Skip to main content

Delivery of screening and brief intervention for unhealthy alcohol use in an urban academic Federally Qualified Health Center

Overview of attention for article published in Addiction Science & Clinical Practice, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 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
Delivery of screening and brief intervention for unhealthy alcohol use in an urban academic Federally Qualified Health Center
Published in
Addiction Science & Clinical Practice, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13722-017-0100-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marcus A. Bachhuber, Megan A. O’Grady, Henry Chung, Charles J. Neighbors, Joseph DeLuca, Elenita M. D’Aloia, Arelis Diaz, Chinazo O. Cunningham

Abstract

Screening and brief intervention (SBI) for unhealthy drinking has not been widely implemented in primary care partly due to reliance on physicians to perform it. We implemented a model of nursing staff-delivered SBI for unhealthy drinking for adult patients receiving primary care at an academically-affiliated Federally Qualified Health Center in the Bronx, NY. Our model consisted of nursing staff screening all patients with the alcohol use disorders identification test consumption questions (AUDIT-C) and, if screening positive, providing BI or referral to specialty services. We developed a clinical decision support tool integrated into the electronic health record to guide nursing staff and record SBI provision. To evaluate this model, we determined overall SBI delivery to patients and factors associated with receiving SBI. Between October 2013 and September 2014, 9119 unique adult patients made 24,285 visits. Patients were majority women (67.5%) and Hispanic/Latino (54.5%). Overall, 46.2% were screened, with 19.0-35.8% of eligible patients screened in each month. Increasing age (OR: 0.82 [95% CI 0.80-0.85] for a 10-year increase), female sex (OR: 0.83 [95% CI 0.77-0.91]), and chronic conditions like hypertension (OR: 0.62 [95% CI 0.56-0.70]) and diabetes (OR: 0.66 [95% CI 0.58-0.75]), among others, were associated with a lower odds of being screened. Of all patients screened, 225 (5.3%) screened positive and of those patients, 122 (54.2%) received a BI. Patients with higher AUDIT-C scores were more likely to receive a BI (OR: 1.24 [95% CI 1.04-1.47] for a 1-point increase) and non-English speaking patients were less likely to receive a BI than those who spoke English (OR: 0.42 [95% CI 0.18-0.97]). Our model of SBI resulted in screening of nearly half of all eligible patients and BI provision to over half of those screening positive. Future efforts to improve SBI delivery should focus on groups such as older adults, women, and those with chronic medical conditions.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 20%
Researcher 5 11%
Student > Master 5 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Lecturer 3 7%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 12 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 11 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 15%
Psychology 4 9%
Social Sciences 3 7%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 12 26%

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 15 December 2017.
All research outputs
#2,600,657
of 15,922,434 outputs
Outputs from Addiction Science & Clinical Practice
#94
of 292 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,905
of 410,448 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Addiction Science & Clinical Practice
#14
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,922,434 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 292 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 410,448 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 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 58% of its contemporaries.