***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: AIM To establish the efficacy of a brief motivational intervention compared to feedback only when delivered in an emergency department for reducing alcohol use and problems among young adults . DESIGN Two-group r and omized controlled trial with follow-up assessment s at 6 and 12 months . SETTING Level I Trauma Center . PARTICIPANTS A total of 198 18 - 24-year-old patients who were either alcohol positive upon hospital admission or met screening criteria for alcohol problems . INTERVENTION Participants were assigned r and omly to receive a one-session motivational intervention ( MI ) that included personalized feedback , or the personalized feedback report only ( FO ) . All participants received additional telephone contact 1 month and 3 months after baseline . MEASUREMENTS Demographic information , alcohol use , alcohol problems and treatment seeking . FINDINGS Six months after the intervention MI participants drank on fewer days , had fewer heavy drinking days and drank fewer drinks per week in the past month than did FO patients . These effects were maintained at 12 months . Clinical significance evaluation indicated that twice as many MI participants as FO participants reliably reduced their volume of alcohol consumption from baseline to 12 months . Reductions in alcohol-related injuries and moving violations , and increases in alcohol treatment-seeking were observed across both conditions at both follow-ups with no differences between conditions . CONCLUSIONS This study provides new data supporting the potential of the motivational intervention tested to reduce alcohol consumption among high-risk youth AIMS To assess the effectiveness of brief motivational intervention for alcohol and drug use in young adult primary care patients in a low-income population and country . METHODS A r and omized controlled trial in a public-sector clinic in Delft , a township in the Western Cape , South Africa recruited 403 patients who were r and omized to either single-session , nurse practitioner-delivered Brief Motivational Intervention plus referral list or usual care plus referral list , and followed up at 3 months . RESULTS Although rates of at-risk alcohol use and drug use did not differ by treatment arm at follow-up , patients assigned to the Brief Motivational Intervention had significantly reduced scores on ASSIST ( Alcohol , Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test ) for alcohol-the most prevalent substance . CONCLUSION Brief Motivational Intervention may be effective at reducing at-risk alcohol use in the short term among low-income young adult primary care patients ; additional research is needed to examine long-term outcomes OBJECTIVE Compared with older adults , emerging adults ( 18 - 29 years old ) entering treatment typically have less severe alcohol use consequences . Also , their unique clinical presentations ( e.g. , modest initial abstinence motivation ) and developmental context s ( e.g. , drinking-rich social networks ) may make a straightforward implementation of treatments developed for adults less effective . Yet , this has seldom been examined empirically . This study was a secondary analysis of Project MATCH ( Matching Alcoholism Treatments to Client Heterogeneity ) data examining ( a ) overall differences between emerging adults and older adults ( ≥30 years old ) on outcomes during treatment and at 1-year follow-up , and ( b ) whether emerging adults had poorer outcomes on any of the three Project MATCH treatments in particular . METHOD Participants were 267 emerging adults and 1,459 older adults r and omly assigned to  individually delivered cognitive-behavioral therapy ( CBT ) , motivational enhancement therapy ( MET ) , or 12-step facilitation ( TSF ) . Multilevel growth curve models tested differences on percentage of days abstinent ( PDA ) and drinks per drinking day ( DDD ) by age group and treatment assignment . RESULTS During treatment , compared with older adults , emerging adults reported more DDD but similar PDA . Further , emerging adults assigned to TSF had less PDA and more DDD than emerging adults and older adults assigned to CBT or MET during treatment ( i.e. , emerging adults in TSF has poorer outcomes initially ) , but this matching effect was not evident at 1-year follow-up . CONCLUSIONS This study is among the first to test age group differences across three psychosocial interventions shown to be efficacious treatments for alcohol use disorder . Although emerging adults generally did as well as their older counterparts , they may require a more developmentally sensitive approach to bolster TSF effects during treatment OBJECTIVES Adolescents in their late teens and early 20s have the highest alcohol consumption in the United States ; binge drinking peaks at age 21 - 25 years . Underage drinking is associated with many negative consequences , including academic problems and risk of intentional and unintentional injuries . This study tested the effectiveness of pediatric emergency department ( PED ) screening and brief intervention to reduce alcohol consumption and associated risks . METHODS A three-group r and omized assignment trial was structured to test differences between intervention ( I ) and st and ard assessed control ( AC ) groups in alcohol consumption and alcohol-related behaviors from baseline to 12 months and to compare the AC group with a minimally assessed control ( MAC ) group to adjust for the effect of assessment reactivity on control group behavior . Patients aged 14 - 21 years were eligible if they screened positive on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test ( AUDIT ) or for binge drinking or high-risk behaviors . The MAC group received a re source h and out , written advice about alcohol-related risks , and a 12-month follow-up appointment . Patients in the AC group were assessed using st and ardized instruments in addition to the MAC protocol . The I group received a peer-conducted motivational intervention , referral to community re sources and treatment if indicated , and a 10-day booster in addition to assessment . Measurements included 30-day self-report of alcohol consumption and alcohol-related behaviors , screens for depression and posttraumatic stress disorder , and self-report of attempts to quit , cut back , or change conditions of use , all repeated at follow-up . Motor vehicle records and medical records were also analyzed for changes from baseline to 1-year follow-up . RESULTS Among 7,807 PED patients screened , 1,202 were eligible ; 853 enrolled ( I , n = 283 ; AC , n = 284 ; MAC , n = 286 ) , with a 12-month follow-up rate of 72 % . At 12 months , more than half of enrollees in Reaching Adolescents for Prevention ( RAP ) attempted to cut back on drinking , and over a third tried to quit . A significantly larger proportion of the I group made efforts to quit drinking and to be careful about situations when drinking compared to AC enrollees , and there was a numerically but not significantly greater likelihood ( p = 0.065 ) among the I group for efforts to cut back on drinking . At 3 months , the likelihood of the I group making attempts to cut back was almost triple that of ACs . For efforts to quit , it was double , and for trying to be careful about situations when drinking , there was a 72 % increase in the odds ratio ( OR ) for the I group . Three-month results for attempts were sustained at 12 months for quit attempts and efforts to be careful . Consumption declined in both groups from baseline to 3 months to 12 months , but there were no significant between-group differences in alcohol-related consequences at 12 months or in alcohol-related risk behaviors . We found a pattern suggestive of assessment reactivity in only one variable at 12 months : the attempt to cut back ( 73.3 % for the I group vs. 64.9 % among the AC group and 54.8 % among the MAC group ) . CONCLUSIONS Brief motivational intervention result ed in significant efforts to change behavior ( quit drinking and be careful about situations while drinking ) but did not alter between-group consumption or consequences Background Current insights indicate that Web-based delivery may enhance the implementation of brief alcohol interventions . Previous research showed that electronically delivered brief alcohol interventions decreased alcohol use in college students and adult problem drinkers . To date , no study has investigated the effectiveness of Web-based brief alcohol interventions in reducing alcohol use in younger population s. Objective The present study tested 2 main hypotheses , that is , whether an online multicomponent brief alcohol intervention was effective in reducing alcohol use among 15- to 20-year-old binge drinkers and whether inclusion of normative feedback would increase the effectiveness of this intervention . In additional analyses , we examined possible moderation effects of participant ’s sex , which we had not a priori hypothesized . Method A total of 575 online panel members ( aged 15 to 20 years ) who were screened as binge drinkers were r and omly assigned to ( 1 ) a Web-based brief alcohol intervention without normative feedback , ( 2 ) a Web-based brief alcohol intervention with normative feedback , or ( 3 ) a control group ( no intervention ) .  Alcohol use and moderate drinking were assessed at baseline , 1 month , and 3 months after the intervention . Separate analyses were conducted for participants in the original sample ( n = 575 ) and those who completed both posttests ( n = 278 ) . Missing values in the original sample were imputed by using the multiple imputation procedure of PASW Statistics 18 . Results Main effects of the intervention were found only in the multiple imputed data set for the original sample suggesting that the intervention without normative feedback reduced weekly drinking in the total group both 1 and 3 months after the intervention ( n = 575 , at the 1-month follow-up , beta = -.24 , P = .05 ; at the 3-month follow-up , beta = -.25 , P = .04 ) . Furthermore , the intervention with normative feedback reduced weekly drinking only at 1 month after the intervention ( n=575 , beta = -.24 , P = .008 ) . There was also a marginally significant trend of the intervention without normative feedback on responsible drinking at the 3-month follow-up ( n = 575 , beta = .40 , P = .07 ) implying a small increase in moderate drinking at the 3-month follow-up . Additional analyses on both data sets testing our post hoc hypothesis about a possible differential intervention effect for males and females revealed that this was the case for the impact of the intervention without normative feedback on weekly drinking and moderate drinking at the 1-month follow-up ( weekly drinking for n = 278 , beta = -.80 , P = .01 , and for n = 575 , beta = -.69 , P = .009 ; moderate drinking for n = 278 , odds ratio [ OR ] = 3.76 , confidence interval [ CI ] 1.05 - 13.49 , P = .04 , and for n = 575 , OR = 3.00 , CI = 0.89 - 10.12 , P = .08 ) and at the 3-month follow-up ( weekly drinking for n = 278 , beta = -.58 , P = .05 , and for n = 575 , beta = -.75 , P = .004 ; moderate drinking for n = 278 , OR = 4.34 , CI = 1.18 - 15.95 , P = .04 , and for n = 575 , OR = 3.65 , CI = 1.44 - 9.25 , P = .006 ) . Furthermore , both data sets showed an interaction effect between the intervention with normative feedback and participant ’s sex on weekly alcohol use at the 1-month follow-up ( for n = 278 , beta = -.74 , P = .02 , and for n = 575 , beta = -.64 , P = .01 ) and for moderate drinking at the 3-month follow-up ( for n = 278 , OR = 3.10 , CI = 0.81 - 11.85 , P = .07 , and for n = 575 , OR = 3.00 , CI = 1.23 - 7.27 , P = .01 ) . Post hoc probing indicated that males who received the intervention showed less weekly drinking and were more likely to drink moderately at 1 month and at 3 months following the intervention . For females , the interventions yielded no effects : the intervention without normative feedback even showed a small unfavorable effect at the 1-month follow-up . Conclusion The present study demonstrated that exposure to a Web-based brief alcohol intervention generated a decrease in weekly drinking among 15- to 20-year-old binge drinkers but did not encourage moderate drinking in the total sample . Additional analyses revealed that intervention effects were most prominent in males result ing in less weekly alcohol use and higher levels of moderate drinking among 15- to 20-year-old males over a period of 1 to 3 months . Trial Registration IS RCT N50512934 ; http://www.controlled-trials.com/IS RCT N50512934/ ( Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/5usICa3Tx OBJECTIVES Marijuana was involved in 209,563 emergency department ( ED ) visits in 2006 , according to the Drug Abuse Warning Network . Although screening and brief intervention ( SBI ) has been effective in changing drinking among ED patients in a number of studies , tests of marijuana SBI in a pediatric emergency department ( PED ) have not yet been reported . The aim of this pilot study was to test whether SBI is effective in reducing marijuana consumption among youth and young adults presenting to a PED with a diverse range of clinical entities . METHODS A three-group r and omized controlled preliminary trial was structured to test 1 ) differences between Intervention ( Int ) and st and ard Assessed Control ( AC ) groups in marijuana consumption , from baseline to 12 
    Output:
    
Comparisons across treatment types typically yielded nonsignificant results .
Across prevention and treatment studies , smaller effects existed for studies delivering personalized feedback interventions .
Overall effects were similar to current meta-analyses on college drinking .