Digital interventions to moderate alcohol consumption in young people: a Cancer Prevention Europe overview of systematic reviews

Ref ID 1042
First Author K.T. McDermott
Journal FRONTIERS IN DIGITAL HEALTH
Year Of Publishing 2023
URL https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/digital-health/articles/10.3389/fdgth.2023.1178407/full
Keywords • Oncology
• Currency
• Risk of bias
Problem(s) • High risk of bias (ROBIS)
• Outdated searches
Article Type Empirical
Article Subtype Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review
First Author Country United Kingdom
Checklists • ROBIS
Aim To assess the risk of bias (ROBIS) of systematic reviews (SRs) of digital interventions aimed at reducing alcohol consumption in sub-populations of young people indexed across relevant databases including KSR Evidence, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) from inception to April 2021.
Level of Investigation Descriptive
Summary of Findings From 27 included systematic reviews (SRs) of digital interventions aimed at reducing alcohol consumption in sub-populations of young people indexed across relevant databases including KSR Evidence, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) from inception to April 2021. Twenty two of the 27 (81.4%) included reviews had a high risk of bias (RoB), with a low RoB rating in only five of the included reviews (18.5%). Over half of the reviews (16/27, 59.2%) were considered likely to be out-of-date (having a search end date before 2016 and thus likely to detail technology that has been surpassed by newer developments or superseded primary research). The ROBIS items which either had no information or "probably no" concerned 1) the eligibility criteria being unambiguous 2) restrictions based on date, publication format, or language appropriate 3) the searches including an appropriate range of databases 4) efforts made to minimise error in data collection and 5) the interpretation of findings address all the concerns identified in Domains 1 to 4 (eligibility criteria).
Number of systematic reviews included 27
Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed 13903
Treatment impacted Not Applicable
Treatment impacted description
Interpretation impacted Not Applicable
Interpretation impacted description