↓ Skip to main content

Evaluating the (cost-)effectiveness of guided and unguided Internet-based self-help for problematic alcohol use in employees - a three arm randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
210 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
Evaluating the (cost-)effectiveness of guided and unguided Internet-based self-help for problematic alcohol use in employees - a three arm randomized controlled trial
Published in
BMC Public Health, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-2375-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Leif Boß, Dirk Lehr, Matthias Berking, Heleen Riper, Michael Patrick Schaub, David Daniel Ebert

Abstract

Problematic alcohol consumption is associated with a high disease burden for affected individuals and has a detrimental impact on companies and society due to direct and indirect health costs. This protocol describes a study design to evaluate the (cost)-effectiveness of a guided and unguided Internet-based self-help intervention for employees called "GET.ON Clever weniger trinken" (be smart - drink less) compared to a waiting list control group. In a three-arm randomized controlled trial, 528 German adults who are currently members of the workforce will be recruited by occupational health departments of major health insurance companies. Employees aged 18 and older displaying problematic drinking patterns (>21/14 drinks per week and an AUDIT score > 8/6 for men/women) will be randomly assigned to one of three following study conditions: 1. unguided web-based self-help for problematic drinking, 2. adherence-focused guided self-help, and 3. waiting list control. Self-report data will be collected at baseline (T1), 6 weeks (T2), and 6 months (T3) after randomization. The primary outcome will be the reduction of alcohol standard units during the 7 days prior to T2, using the Timeline Followback method. Cost-effectiveness analyses to determine direct and indirect costs will be conducted from the perspectives of employers and the society. Data will be analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis and per protocol. There is a need to identify effective low-threshold solutions to improve ill-health and reduce the negative economic consequences due to problematic alcohol drinking in workforces. If the proposed web-based intervention proves both to be efficacious and cost-effective, it may be a useful tool to increase utilization rates of interventions for problematic drinking in occupational settings. German Register of Clinical Studies (DRKS): DRKS00006105 , date of registration: 2014-07-07.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 210 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Switzerland 2 <1%
Unknown 206 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 34 16%
Researcher 33 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 13%
Student > Bachelor 25 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 4%
Other 28 13%
Unknown 53 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 53 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 31 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 9%
Social Sciences 12 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 7 3%
Other 25 12%
Unknown 64 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 10 June 2016.
All research outputs
#13,215,559
of 22,830,751 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#9,285
of 14,872 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,098
of 279,097 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#171
of 277 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,830,751 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,872 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 279,097 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 277 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.