Skills training, alcohol focus: Blood alcohol concentration (BAC) feedback aloneb
BAC feedback programs involve presenting students with their actual BAC, usually based on breath samples, during or following an evening of drinking. These programs challenge students’ perceptions of their level of intoxication based on an objective BAC measurement or provide an incentive for students to limit their alcohol consumption (e.g., remaining under a certain BAC at a social event).
Effectiveness: X = Not effective
Cost: $$ = Mid-range
Barriers: # = Lower
Research Amount: ** = 4 to 6 studies
Public Health Reach: Focused
Primary Modality: In-person individual
Staffing Expertise Needed: Coordinator
Target Population: Individuals or specific groups
Duration of Effects: No short-term (< 6 months) effects; long-term (? 6 months) effects not assessed
b = Intervention changed position in the matrix
Although this approach is a component of larger, effective programs such as BASICS and ASTP, it is evaluated here as a stand-alone intervention.
Cost ratings are based on the relative program and staff costs for adoption, implementation, and maintenance of a strategy. Actual costs will vary by institution, depending on size, existing programs, and other campus and community factors. Barriers to implementing a strategy include cost and opposition, among other factors. Public health reach refers to the number of students that a strategy affects. Strategies with a broad reach affect all students or a large group of students (e.g., all underage students); strategies with a focused reach affect individuals or small groups of students (e.g., sanctioned students). Research amount/quality refers to the number of randomized controlled trials (RCT) that evaluated the strategy. Duration of effects refers to the timeframe within which the intervention demonstrated effects on alcohol-related behavioral outcomes; follow-up periods for short-term effects were <6 months; follow-up periods for long-term effects were ≥6 months.
Cronce, J.M.; and Larimer, M.E. Individual-focused approaches to the prevention of college student drinking. Alcohol Research and Health 34(2):210-21, 2011.
- Glindemann, K.E.; Ehrhart, I.J.; Drake, E.A.; and Geller, E.S. Reducing excessive alcohol consumption at university fraternity parties: A cost-effective incentive/reward intervention. Addictive Behaviors 32(1):39–48, 2007.
- Thombs, D.L.; Olds, R.S.; Osborn, C.J.; Casseday, S.; Glavin, K.; and Berkowitz, A.D. Outcomes of a technology-based social norms intervention to deter alcohol use in freshman residence halls. Journal of American College Health 55(6):325–32, 2007.
References from 2019 update
- Gajecki, M.; Berman, A.H.; Sinadinovic, K.; et al. Mobile phone brief intervention applications for risky alcohol use among university students: A randomized controlled study. Addiction Science & Clinical Practice 9(1):11, 2014.
Resources are only identified for programs with sufficient research support for CollegeAIM to rate as effective at any level (higher, moderate, or lower).