Citation

Tiburcio M, Monteiro MG, Shorter GW, Martínez-Vélez N, Ronzani T, Maiga LA. J. Stud. Alcohol Drugs 2022; 83(1): 153-158.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2022, Alcohol Research Documentation, Inc., Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

35040771

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to identify priority variables to evaluate alcohol brief interventions from the perspective of experts in the field in Latin America.

METHOD: A two-round Delphi procedure was carried out through online surveys of 465 individuals from 18 Latin American countries, including core outcome set developers, researchers, health professionals, users of healthcare services, journal editors, members of nongovernmental organizations, and policymakers. The questionnaire, in Spanish and Portuguese, rated 101 variables according to their relevance to the efficacy and effectiveness of brief interventions.

RESULTS: Round 1 yielded 47 variables that met the consensus criterion of at least 70% of participants; Round 2 yielded 63 variables. To reduce the possible effect of varying levels of expertise, data were analyzed by subgroup, with consensus defined as 70% of each subgroup rating a variable as critical. Seventeen outcome variables met this criterion, 14 from the initial set and 3 suggested by the participants in Round 1.

CONCLUSIONS: Only four outcomes coincide with the findings of a similar international Delphi study that underrepresented Latin American countries. The findings point to the importance of including a wider variety of professionals and cultural backgrounds in international consensus panels to minimize the risk of predominance of a single perspective.

Language: en