ÜBERMAD

GoalsReview

Talks that build motivation seem to bring small drops in teens' substance use

HelpedThe short version

Across 21 studies, talks that build motivation led to small drops in teens' substance use compared with other groups.

A sixteen-year-old girl across a low table from a listening counsellor moves a cigarette pack a little away and back.
21
studies pooled
5,471
teenagers in 21 studies on substance use
1 tool
tested

The review

  1. Who took part

    The review pooled 21 studies with 5,471 teenagers aged 12 to 21. Men were a little over half, and most studies recruited from the community rather than clinics.

  2. What they did

    Most studies gave one talking session, and the average was about four. Most comparison groups were not given the talks.

  3. What happened

    Across all 21 studies, teens who got the talks showed a small drop in substance use compared with other groups. The small drop was still there in studies checked later, though the review's own numbers do not match in one place. The review did not check each study's quality or test for missing studies. It also did not rate how sure its results are.

What the review found

  1. Helped

    Across 21 studies, talks that build motivation led to small drops in teens' substance use compared with other groups.

    Pooled analysis of 21 studies with 5,471 people · vs groups that mostly got no talks · ⚠ whole programmes were tested, so no single part can be credited; mixes trials with other kinds of study

  2. Helped

    In 4 studies checked less than six months later, the talks still led to a drop in substance use.

    Pooled analysis of 4 studies · vs groups that mostly got no talks · ⚠ whole programmes were tested, so no single part can be credited; mixes trials with other kinds of study

  3. Helped

    In 7 studies checked more than six months later, the talks still led to a small drop in substance use.

    Pooled analysis of 7 studies · vs groups that mostly got no talks · ⚠ whole programmes were tested, so no single part can be credited; mixes trials with other kinds of study

How solid is this?

  • Large group
  • Numbers unreliable
  • Summary claims more than the results show
  • Whole programmes were tested, so no single part can be credited
  • Mixes trials with other kinds of study
  • Signs that small negative studies went unpublished
  • The review didn't check the studies' quality or look for missing studies

Source

Effectiveness of Motivational Interviewing Interventions for Adolescent Substance Use Behavior Change: A Meta-Analytic Review (2011)

DOI: 10.1037/a0023992 (opens in a new tab)

More on goals

See all