Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 14, 2025

A Prediction Error-driven Retrieval Procedure for Destabilizing and Rewriting Maladaptive Reward Memories in Hazardous Drinkers
Published on: January 5, 2018
A Randomized Controlled Trial of the Prevent Alcohol and Risk-Related Trauma in Youth Program in Reducing
Jason R Watterson1,2,3, Belinda Gabbe1,4, Paul Dietze1,5
1Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia.
Background:
The aim of this study was to test whether participation in an alcohol risk reduction program known as Prevent Alcohol and Risk-Related Trauma in Youth (P.A.R.T.Y.) is effective in reducing the prevalence of risky drinking at 12 months' post-intervention in a sample of Royal Australian Navy (RAN) trainees.
Methods:
A non-blinded randomized controlled trial of 952 RAN trainees comparing two forms of P.A.R.T.Y. plus RAN annual alcohol and other drug awareness training with annual alcohol and other drugs awareness training only (Control). Participants were screened at baseline and at 12-month follow-up using the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT). Participants were randomized to one of three arms: (1) in-hospital P.A.R.T.Y program, (2) on-base P.A.R.T.Y. program, or (3) control.The primary outcome measure was the percentage of participants reporting an AUDIT score of 8 or above at 12 months in each group. A secondary outcome considered was reports of alcohol-related incidents in the 12-month follow-up.
Results:
There was no difference in the risk of reporting an AUDIT score of 8 or above in either the in-hospital (Relative Risk (RR) 0.96, 95% CI: 0.75-1.23; P = .75) or on-base (RR 1.11, 95% CI: 0.89-1.369; P = 0.35) intervention groups, compared to the control group. Compared to the on-base group, there was no difference in the risk of reporting an AUDIT score of 8 or above in the in-hospital group (RR 1.16, 95% CI: 0.90-1.48; P = .24). The rate of reporting an alcohol-related incident was not different for the in-hospital (Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.60, 95% CI: 0.27-1.33; P = .21) or on-base (HR 0.50, 95% CI: 0.21-1.16; P = .11) intervention groups when compared to the control group.
Conclusion:
Participation in either an on-base or an in-hospital P.A.R.T.Y. program did not affect the proportion of naval trainee participants screening positive for risky drinking on the AUDIT.
More Related Videos
05:40The Motivation for Alcohol Reward: Predictors of Progressive-Ratio Intravenous Alcohol Self-Administration in Humans
Published on: April 28, 2022
07:50A Method for Evaluating the Reinforcing Properties of Ethanol in Rats without Water Deprivation, Saccharin Fading or Extended Access Training
Published on: January 29, 2017