Background Worldwide, problem drinking is a leading risk factor for disease burden and mortality. To reduce this burden, effective interventions are required. Mobile phone-based alcohol...Show moreBackground Worldwide, problem drinking is a leading risk factor for disease burden and mortality. To reduce this burden, effective interventions are required. Mobile phone-based alcohol interventions show promise due to their ease of use and scalability. However, there is limited knowledge regarding their overall effectiveness. As it is a rapidly developing field, this meta-analysis captures the current state of evidence. Mobile phone-based alcohol interventions are expected to be more effective than control groups with minimal or no intervention. Methods A systematic literature search and meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA guidelines. In April 2022 the databases PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science were searched to identify eligible studies. The search focused on publications between 2010 and 2022, without language restrictions. Randomised controlled trials comparing mobile phone-based interventions with minimal or no intervention control conditions were included. Studies with interventions tailored to students and pregnant women were excluded. Outcome data were extracted and the pooled effect size was calculated with a random effects model. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and quality of evidence with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Results Five studies with 1672 participants were included and revealed a combined small effect size (Hedges’ g = -0.28, 95% CI [-0.76, 0.21]), which was insignificant (p = .19). Intervention duration and mode of delivery did not have a significant moderating effect on the outcome. Between-study heterogeneity was high and influence analyses revealed one study potentially overly contributing to the heterogeneity. There was no evidence of publication bias. Risk of bias was considered to be high for each study and the overall quality of evidence was judged to be low. Conclusion The current study found no support for the efficacy of mobile phone-based alcohol intervention compared to minimal or no intervention control groups to reduce adult problem drinking. These results should be interpreted cautiously due to the small number of studies and concerns regarding the quality of evidence. Future researchers should consider using a standard set of outcome measures to make findings in this area more comparable.Show less
