Do Brief Motivational Interventions Reduce Alcohol-impaired Driving Among College Students? A Meta-analysis of Individual Participant Data

This data source provides the data and R computing code to replicate the analysis reported in Mun et al. (2022). Do brief alcohol interventions reduce driving after drinking among college students? A two-step meta-analysis of individual participant data. Alcohol and Alcoholism, 57, 125–135. https://doi.org/10.1093/alcalc/agaa146

Abstract
Aims: College students who drink are at an increased risk of driving after drinking and alcohol involved traffic accidents and deaths. Furthermore, the persistence of driving after drinking over time underscores a need for effective interventions to prevent future drunk driving in adulthood. The present study examined whether brief alcohol interventions (BAIs) for college students reduce driving after drinking.
Methods: A two-step meta-analysis of individual participant data (IPD) was conducted using a combined sample of 6801 college students from 15 randomized controlled trials (38% male, 72% White and 58% first-year students). BAIs included individually delivered Motivational Interviewing with Personalized Feedback (MI + PF), Group Motivational Interviewing (GMI), and stand-alone Personalized Feedback (PF) interventions. Two outcome variables, driving after two+/three+ drinks and driving after four+/five+ drinks, were checked, harmonized and analyzed separately for each study and then combined for meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis.
Results: BAIs lowered the risk of driving after four+/five+ drinks (19% difference in the odds of driving after drinking favoring BAIs vs. control), but not the risk of driving after two+/three+ drinks (9% difference). Subsequent subgroup analysis indicated that MI + PF intervention was comparatively better than stand-alone PF or GMI.
Conclusions: BAIs provide a harm reduction approach to college drinking. Hence, it is encouraging that BAIs reduce the risk of driving after heavy drinking among college students. However, there may be opportunities to enhance the intervention content and timing to be more relevant for driving after drinking and improve the outcome assessment and reporting to demonstrate its effect.

本数据源提供了用于复制 Mun 等人（2022年）所报告分析的所需数据和 R 计算代码。简短酒精干预是否能够降低大学生饮酒后驾驶的风险？一项针对个体参与者数据的两步元分析。酒精与酒精依赖，第57卷，第125–135页。https://doi.org/10.1093/alcalc/agaa146

摘要

目的：饮酒的大学生面临饮酒后驾驶、酒精相关交通事故及死亡风险增加。此外，随着时间的推移，饮酒后驾驶行为的持续性凸显了预防成年后未来醉酒驾驶的有效干预措施的需求。本研究旨在考察针对大学生的简短酒精干预（BAIs）是否能够降低饮酒后的驾驶行为。

方法：对来自15项随机对照试验（男性占38%，白人占72%，一年级学生占58%）的6801名大学生的个体参与者数据（IPD）进行了两步元分析。BAIs 包括个性化反馈的动机访谈（MI + PF）、团体动机访谈（GMI）和独立的个性化反馈（PF）干预。检查、调和并分别对每个研究中的两个结果变量——饮酒后两杯/三杯以上和饮酒后四杯/五杯以上——进行分析，然后进行元分析和元回归分析。

结果：BAIs 降低了饮酒后四杯/五杯以上驾驶的风险（饮酒后驾驶的概率优势在 BAIs 与对照组之间存在19%的差异），但并未降低饮酒后两杯/三杯以上驾驶的风险（差异为9%）。后续的亚组分析表明，MI + PF 干预相对于独立的 PF 或 GMI 干预效果更佳。

结论：BAIs 为大学生饮酒提供了一种减少伤害的方法。因此，简短酒精干预能够降低大学生大量饮酒后的驾驶风险，这令人鼓舞。然而，可能存在提升干预内容和时机以更符合饮酒后驾驶行为、改善结果评估和报告以展示其效果的机会。