Alcohol misuse occurs commonly on college campuses, necessitating prevention programs to help college drinkers reduce consumption and minimize harmful consequences. Computer-delivered interventions (CDIs) have been widely used due to their low cost and ease of dissemination but whether CDIs are efficacious and whether they produce benefits equivalent to face-to-face interventions (FTFIs) remain unclear. Therefore, we identified controlled trials of both CDIs and FTFIs and used meta-analysis (a) to determine the relative efficacy of these two approaches and (b) to test predictors of intervention efficacy. We included studies examining FTFIs (N = 5,237; 56% female; 87% White) and CDIs (N = 32,243; 51% female; 81% White). Independent raters coded participant characteristics, design and methodological features, intervention content, and calculated weighted mean effect sizes using fixed and random-effects models. Analyses indicated that, compared to controls, FTFI participants drank less, drank less frequently, and reported fewer problems at short-term follow-up (d+s = 0.15 – 0.19); they continued to consume lower quantities at intermediate (d+ = 0.23) and long-term (d+ = 0.14) follow-ups. Compared to controls, CDI participants reported lower quantities, frequency, and peak intoxication at short-term follow-up (d+s = 0.13 – 0.29), but these effects were not maintained. Direct comparisons between FTFI and CDIs were infrequent, but these trials favored the FTFIs on both quantity and problems measures (d+s = 0.12–0.20). Moderator analyses identified participant and intervention characteristics that influence intervention efficacy. Overall, we conclude that FTFIs provide the most effective and enduring effects.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on health and well-being worldwide and there is increasing recognition of the need to understand the psychological impact of COVID-19 experiences and stress in addition to the physical health consequences. Methods The present study examined how experiences related to COVID-19 and associated stress impact, anxiety, depression, and functional impairment in a convenience sample of 565 American adults (57.9% male) recruited through MTURK. Results COVID-19 experiences were consistently associated with higher odds of probable anxiety and depression diagnoses (ORs ≥ 3.0). COVID-19 associated stress also predicted large proportions of variance (R 2 ≥ 30) in anxiety, depression, health anxiety, and functional impairment in latent variable analyses. Conclusions These findings highlight that personal experiences related to the diagnosis of COVID-19, mortality in acquaintances, and COVID-19 associated stress is associated with a greatly elevated risk of emotional disorder symptomatology and that the COVID-19 pandemic may result in increased demand for mental health services.

Highlights COVID-19 psychological factors may be risk factors for substance use initiation. COVID-19-related worry is specifically related to using substances to cope during the pandemic. COVID-19-related psychological factors may require specific clinical attention.

Objective Alcohol use established during the first-year of college can result in adverse consequences during the college years and beyond. This meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy of interventions to prevent alcohol misuse by first-year college students. Methods Prevention studies were included if the study reported an individual- or group-level intervention using a randomized controlled trial, targeted first-year college students, and assessed alcohol use. Forty-one studies with 62 separate interventions (N = 24,294; 57% women; 77% White) were included. Independent raters coded sample, design, methodological features, and intervention content. Weighted mean effect sizes, using fixed- and random-effects models, were calculated. Potential moderators, determined a priori, were examined to explain variability in effect sizes. Results Relative to controls, students receiving an intervention reported lower quantity and frequency of drinking and fewer problems (d+s = 0.07 – 0.14). These results were more pronounced when the interventions were compared to an assessment-only control group (d+s = 0.11 – 0.19). Intervention content (e.g., personalized feedback) moderated the efficacy of the intervention. Conclusions Behavioral interventions for first-year college students reduce alcohol consumption and alcohol-related problems. Interventions that include personalized feedback, moderation strategies, expectancy challenge, identification of risky situations, and goal setting optimize efficacy. Strategies to prevent alcohol misuse among first-year students are recommended.