Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Public Health
Published in: BMC Public Health 1/2013

Open Access 01-12-2013 | Study protocol

Web-based cognitive bias modification for problem drinkers: protocol of a randomised controlled trial with a 2x2x2 factorial design

Authors: Denise S van Deursen, Elske Salemink, Filip Smit, Jeannet Kramer, Reinout W Wiers

Published in: BMC Public Health | Issue 1/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The automatic tendency to attend to, positively evaluate and approach alcohol related stimuli has been found to play a causal role in problematic alcohol use and can be retrained by computerised Cognitive Bias Modification (CBM). In spite of CBMs potential as an internet intervention, little is known about the efficacy of web-based CBM. The study described in this protocol will test the effectiveness of web-based CBM in a double blind randomised controlled trial with a 2 (attention bias retraining: real versus placebo) x 2 (alcohol/no-go training: real versus placebo) x 2 (approach bias retraining: real versus placebo) factorial design.

Methods/design

The effectiveness of 12 sessions of CBM will be examined among problem drinkers aged 18–65 who are randomly assigned to one of the eight CBM conditions, after completing two modules of a validated cognitive behavioural intervention, DrinkingLess. The primary outcome measure is the change in alcohol use. It is expected that, for each of the CBM interventions, participants in the real CBM conditions will show a greater decrease in alcohol use than participants in the placebo conditions. Secondary outcome measures include the percentage of participants drinking within the limits for sensible drinking. Possible mediating (change in automatic biases) and moderating (working memory, inhibition) factors will be examined, as will the comparative cost-effectiveness of the various CBM strategies.

Discussion

This study will be the first to test the relative efficacy of various web-based CBM strategies in problem drinkers. If proven effective, CBM could be implemented as a low-cost, low-threshold adjuvant to CBT-based online interventions for problem drinkers.

Trial registration

Netherlands Trial register: NTR3875.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Rehm J, Mathers C, Popova S, Thavorncharoensap M, Teerawattananon Y, Patra J: Global burden of disease and injury and economic cost attributable to alcohol use and alcohol-use disorders. Lancet. 2009, 373: 2223-2233.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Riper H, Spek V, Boon B, Conijn B, Kramer J, Martin-Abello K, Smit F: Effectiveness of E-self-help interventions for curbing adult problem drinking: a meta-analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2011, 13 (2): e42-CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
Smit F, Lokkerbol J, Riper H, Majo MC, Boon B, Blankers M: Modeling the cost-effectiveness of health care systems for alcohol use disorders: how implementation of eHealth interventions improves cost-effectiveness. J Med Internet Res. 2011, 13: e56-CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
Robinson TE, Berridge KC: The incentive sensitization theory of addiction: some current issues. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2008, 363: 3137-3146.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
Gladwin TE, Figner B, Crone EA, Wiers RW: Addiction, adolescence, and the integration of control and motivation. Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2011, 1: 364-376.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Wiers RW, Bartholow BD, van Den Wildenberg E, Thush C, Engels RCME, Sher KJ, Grenard J, Ames SL, Stacy AW: Automatic and controlled processes and the development of addictive behaviors in adolescents: a review and a model. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 2007, 86: 263-283.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Reich RR, Below MC, Goldman MS: Explicit and implicit measures of expectancy and related alcohol cognitions: a meta-analytic comparison. Psychol Addict Behav. 2010, 24: 13-25.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Rooke SE, Hine DW, Thorsteinsson EB: Implicit cognition and substance use: a meta-analysis. Addict Behav. 2008, 33: 1314-1328.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Grenard JL, Ames SL, Wiers RW, Thush C, Sussman S, Stacy AW: Working memory capacity moderates the predictive effects of drug-related associations on substance use. Psychol Addict Behav. 2008, 22: 426-432.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Thush C, Wiers RW, Ames SL, Grenard JL, Sussman S, Stacy AW: Interactions between implicit and explicit cognition and working memory capacity in the prediction of alcohol use in at-risk adolescents. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2008, 94: 116-124.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Houben K, Wiers RW: Response inhibition moderates the relationship between implicit associations and drinking behavior. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2009, 33: 626-633.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Peeters M, Wiers RW, Monshouwer K, Schoot R, Janssen T, Vollebergh WA: Automatic processes in at‒risk adolescents: the role of alcohol‒approach tendencies and response inhibition in drinking behavior. Addiction. 2012, 107: 1939-1946.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Thush C, Wiers RW, Moerbeek M, Ames SL, Grenard JL, Sussman S, Stacy AW: Influence of motivational interviewing on explicit and implicit alcohol-related cognition and alcohol use in at-risk adolescents. Psychol Addict Behav. 2009, 23: 146-151.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
Wiers RW, Van De Luitgaarden J, Van Den Wildenberg E, Smulders FTY: Challenging implicit and explicit alcohol‒related cognitions in young heavy drinkers. Addiction. 2005, 100: 806-819.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Field M, Eastwood B: Experimental manipulation of attentional bias increases the motivation to drink alcohol. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2005, 183: 350-357.CrossRef
16.
Schoenmakers TM, de Bruin M, Lux IFM, Goertz AG, Van Kerkhof DHAT, Wiers RW: Clinical effectiveness of attentional bias modification training in abstinent alcoholic patients. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2010, 109: 30-36.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Field M, Duka T, Eastwood B, Child R, Santarcangelo M, Gayton M: Experimental manipulation of attentional biases in heavy drinkers: do the effects generalise?. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2007, 192: 593-608.CrossRef
18.
Schoenmakers T, Wiers RW, Jones BT, Bruce G, Jansen A: Attentional re‒training decreases attentional bias in heavy drinkers without generalization. Addiction. 2007, 102: 399-405.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Houben K, Nederkoorn C, Wiers RW, Jansen A: Resisting temptation: decreasing alcohol-related affect and drinking behavior by training response inhibition. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2011, 116: 132-136.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Houben K, Havermans RC, Nederkoorn C, Jansen A: Beer à No‒Go: Learning to stop responding to alcohol cues reduces alcohol intake via reduced affective associations rather than increased response inhibition. Addiction. 2012, 107: 1280-1287.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Eberl C, Wiers RW, Pawelczack S, Rinck M, Becker ES, Lindenmeyer J: Approach bias modification in alcohol dependence: do clinical effects replicate and for whom does it work best?. Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2013, 4: 38-51.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Wiers RW, Rinck M, Kordts R, Houben K, Strack F: Retraining automatic action‒tendencies to approach alcohol in hazardous drinkers. Addiction. 2010, 105: 279-287.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Wiers RW, Eberl C, Rinck M, Becker ES, Lindenmeyer J: Retraining automatic action tendencies changes alcoholic patients’ approach bias for alcohol and improves treatment outcome. Psychol Sci. 2011, 22: 490-497.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Houben K, Wiers RW, Jansen A: Getting a grip on drinking behavior training working memory to reduce alcohol abuse. Psychol Sci. 2011, 22: 968-975.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Riper H, Kramer J, Smit F, Conijn B, Schippers G, Cuijpers P: Web‒based self‒help for problem drinkers: a pragmatic randomized trial. Addiction. 2008, 103: 218-227.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Amir N, Taylor CT, Donohue MC: Predictors of response to an attention modification program in generalized social phobia. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2011, 79: 533-541.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
27.
Salemink E, Wiers RW: Adolescent threat-related interpretive bias and its modification: the moderating role of regulatory control. Behav Res Ther. 2012, 50: 40-46.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Everaert J, Koster EHW, Derakshan N: The combined cognitive bias hypothesis in depression. Clin Psychol Rev. 2012, 32: 413-424.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Hirsch CR, Clark DM, Mathews A: Imagery and interpretations in social phobia: Support for the combined cognitive biases hypothesis. Behav Ther. 2006, 37: 223-236.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Babor T, Higgins-Biddle JC, Saunders J, Monteiro MG: The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test: Guidelines for use in primary care. 2001, Geneva: World Health Organization, 2
31.
Riper H, Kramer J, Conijn B, Smit F, Schippers G, Cuijpers P: Translating effective web‒based self‒help for problem drinking into the real world. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2009, 33: 1401-1408.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Beard C, Weisberg RB, Primack J: Socially anxious primary care patients’ attitudes toward cognitive bias modification (CBM): a qualitative study. Behav Cogn Psychother. 2011, 1: 1-16.
33.
MacLeod C, Rutherford E, Campbell L, Ebsworthy G, Holker L: Selective attention and emotional vulnerability: assessing the causal basis of their association through the experimental manipulation of attentional bias. J Abnorm Psychol. 2002, 111: 107-123.CrossRefPubMed
34.
MacLeod C, Mathews A, Tata P: Attentional bias in emotional disorders. J Abnorm Psychol. 1986, 95: 15-20.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Sobell LC, Sobell MB: Timeline Follow-back: A technique for assessing self-reported ethanol consumption. Measuring alcohol consumption: psychosocial and biological methods. Edited by: Allen J, Litten RZ. 1992, Totowa, NJ: Humana Press, 41-72.CrossRef
36.
Kokkevi A, Hartgers C: EuropASI: European adaptation of a multidimensional assessment instrument for drug and alcohol dependence. Eur Addict Res. 1995, 1: 208-210.CrossRef
37.
Heatherton TF, Kozlowski LT, Frecker RC, FAGERSTROM KO: The Fagerström test for nicotine dependence: a revision of the Fagerstrom Tolerance Questionnaire. Br J Addict. 1991, 86: 1119-1127.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Heather N, Rollnick S, Bell A: Predictive validity of the readiness to change questionnaire. Addiction. 2006, 88: 1667-1677.CrossRef
39.
Beck AT, Steer RA, Brown GK: Beck Depression Inventory—II, M. 1996, San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation
40.
Spielberger CD, Gorsuch RL, Lushene R, Vagg PR, Jacobs GA: Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. 1983, Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press
41.
Belsky J, Bakermans-Kranenburg MJ, Van IJzendoorn MH: For better and for worse differential susceptibility to environmental influences. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2007, 16: 300-304.CrossRef
42.
Chunhui C, Chuansheng C, Robert M, Hal S, Qinghua H, He L, Jin L, Bi Z, Qi D: Contributions of dopamine-related genes and environmental factors to highly sensitive personality: a multi-step neuronal system-level approach. PLoS One. 2011, 6 (7): e21636-CrossRef
43.
Aron EN, Aron A: Sensory-processing sensitivity and its relation to introversion and emotionality. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1997, 73: 345-368.CrossRefPubMed
44.
Petrides M, Milner B: Deficits on subject-ordered tasks after frontal-and temporal-lobe lesions in man. Neuropsychologia. 1982, 20: 249-262.CrossRefPubMed
45.
Stroop JR: Studies of interference in verbal reactions. J Exp Psychol. 1935, 18: 643-662.CrossRef
46.
Cox WM, Fadardi JS, Pothos EM: The addiction-stroop test: theoretical considerations and procedural recommendations. Psychol Bull. 2006, 132: 443-476.CrossRefPubMed
47.
Menatti AR, Smyth FL, Teachman BA, Nosek BA: Reducing stigma toward individuals with mental illnesses: a brief, online intervention. Stigma Research and Action. in press
48.
Sriram N, Greenwald AG: The brief implicit association test. Experimental Psychology (formerly Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie). 2009, 56: 283-294.CrossRef
49.
British Medical Association: Alcohol: guidelines on sensible drinking. 1995, London: British Medical Association
50.
Love A, James D, Willner P: A comparison of two alcohol craving questionnaires. Addiction. 1998, 93: 1091-1102.CrossRefPubMed
51.
Breslin FC, Sobell LC, Sobell MB, Agrawal S: A comparison of a brief and long version of the situational confidence questionnaire. Behav Res Ther. 2000, 38: 1211-1220.CrossRefPubMed
52.
Rabin R, Charro F: EQ-SD: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann Med. 2001, 33: 337-343.CrossRefPubMed
53.
Hakkaart-van Roijen L: Manual Trimbos/iMTA questionnaire for costs associated with psychiatric illness. 2002, Rotterdam: Institute for Medical Technology Assessment
54.
Erdfelder E, Faul F, Buchner A: GPOWER: a general power analysis program. Behav Res Methods. 1996, 28: 1-11.CrossRef
55.
Scott NW, McPherson GC, Ramsay CR, Campbell MK: The method of minimization for allocation to clinical trials: a review. Control Clin Trials. 2002, 23: 662-674.CrossRefPubMed
56.
57.
Little RJ, Rubin DB: Statistical analysis with missing data. 1987, New York: Wiley
58.
Hakkaart-van Roijen L, Tan S, Bouwmans C: Handleiding voor kostenonderzoek: Methoden en standaard kostprijzen voor economische evaluaties in de gezondheidszorg. 2010, Diemen: College voor zorgverzekeringen
59.
Lamers L, Stalmeier P, McDonnell J, Krabbe P, Van Busschbach J: Kwaliteit van leven meten in economische evaluaties: het Nederlands EQ-5D-tarief. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2005, 149: 1574-1578.PubMed
60.
Wiers RW, Gladwin TE, Hofmann W, Salemink E, Ridderinkhof KR: Cognitive bias modification and cognitive control training in addiction and related psychopathology mechanisms, clinical perspectives, and ways forward. Clin Psychol Sci. 2013, 1: 192-212.CrossRef
61.
Carlbring P, Apelstrand M, Sehlin H, Amir N, Rousseau A, Hofmann SG, Andersson G: Internet-delivered attention bias modification training in individuals with social anxiety disorder-a double blind randomized controlled trial. BMC Psychiatry. 2012, 12: 66-CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
62.
Riper H, Andersson G, Christensen H, Cuijpers P, Lange A, Eysenbach G: Theme issue on e-mental health: a growing field in internet research. J Med Internet Res. 2010, 12:
Metadata
Title
Web-based cognitive bias modification for problem drinkers: protocol of a randomised controlled trial with a 2x2x2 factorial design
Authors
Denise S van Deursen
Elske Salemink
Filip Smit
Jeannet Kramer
Reinout W Wiers
Publication date
01-12-2013
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Public Health / Issue 1/2013
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2458
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-674

Other articles of this Issue 1/2013

BMC Public Health 1/2013 Go to the issue

Research article

[More] evidence to support oral health promotion services targeted to smokers calling tobacco quitlines in the United States

Research article

A cross-sectional examination of modifiable risk factors for chronic disease among a nationally representative sample of youth: are Canadian students graduating high school with a failing grade for health?

Research article

Prevalence of tuberculous lymphadenitis in Gondar University Hospital, Northwest Ethiopia

Research article

Yellow fever vaccination coverage following massive emergency immunization campaigns in rural Uganda, May 2011: a community cluster survey

Research article

Disparities in reported psychosocial assessment across public and private maternity settings: a national survey of women in Australia

Research article

Do computer use, TV viewing, and the presence of the media in the bedroom predict school-aged children’s sleep habits in a longitudinal study?