PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
September 22, 2025British Medical Bulletin3 citationsOpen Access

The effectiveness of digital training on screening, brief interventions, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) for medical and health professionals: a systematic review

View Full Paper
HBHolly BlakeWCWendy J ChaplinAGAlisha Gupta

Key Points

  • Digital SBIRT training may enhance knowledge and confidence among health professionals.
  • Outcomes varied across studies, with 42 articles reviewed and 8985 participants included.
  • Cohort educational web-based learning dominated the studies, highlighting a need for quality improvement.
  • Further high-quality research is required to assess broader health promotion applications.

Abstract

Abstract Introduction The effectiveness of digital SBIRT training for improving knowledge/competence and confidence for health promotion, behavioural and/or health outcomes is not established. We aimed to conduct a systematic review examining the effectiveness of digital training for medical and health professionals on screening, brief interventions, and referral to treatment (SBIRT), on knowledge of the health condition/behaviours, their treatments, and onwards referral to services, and/or changes in attitude, skills, or confidence to promote health. Source of data MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Epistemonikos, Google Scholar, and SCOPUS. Forty-two articles with 8985 participants, published between January 2001 and April 2024, were included. There were eight randomized controlled trials. Only one study was conducted in the UK. Areas of agreement Digital SBIRT training may increase knowledge/competence, confidence, and self-efficacy for SBIRT delivery. Focus is primarily alcohol, tobacco, and substance use. Delivery is mostly web-based programmes, digital patient simulation, or blended learning with a face-to-face component. Areas of controversy Comparison between studies is hampered by heterogeneity in study design, target populations, intervention design and content, comparator/control groups, and outcomes assessed. Growing points Majority of studies were cohort educational web-based learning. Studies were mostly low quality (13/42 with low risk of bias). Outcomes were diverse and often poorly reported. Areas timely for developing research More high-quality research is needed, including assessment of practice, behavioural, and health outcomes. A standardized approach to assuring quality of delivery and testing is required. There is scope to develop, evaluate, and implement SBIRT interventions in a broader range of health promotion areas.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Blake et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68d46fdc31b076d99fa6a46fhttps://doi.org/10.1093/bmb/ldaf013
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews2021 · 11,638 citations
  2. 2Effectiveness of brief interventions as part of the Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) model for reducing the nonmedical use of psychoactive substances: a systematic review2014 · 84 citations
  3. 3United States Emergency Department Screening for Drug Use Among Assault-Injured Individuals: A Systematic Review2022 · 7 citations
  4. 4An Evidence-Based Alcohol Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) Curriculum for Emergency Department (ED) Providers Improves Skills and Utilization2007 · 158 citations
  5. 5Expansion of osteopathic medicine practitioner education on substance use disorders2024 · 3 citations