The conclusions on future challenges for brief intervention (BI) research and for BI dissemination into practice [1], as well as the summary of key BI research findings that the text provides, raise some stimulating issues. As found in the past, a major consideration when interpreting research findings is the difference between northern and southern Europe regarding alcohol research [2], and particularly research into BIs. As the references Nilsen’s paper demonstrate, there is no published BI material generated in southern European countries, even if there are a few exceptions that focus upon primary health care [3–5] or emergency rooms [6]. This i due probably to a combination of both little tradition of alcohol studies and less concern about drinking in southern Europe, where the meaning of alcohol beverages, drinking patterns and presumably hazardous drinking is divergent from other European regions and Englishspeaking countries.
As a consequence, it is worth asking whether further research on the effectiveness of BI is needed for southern Europe,where such a cultural diversity in drinking exists. This may be particularly useful when ‘obtaining knowledge for . . . understanding . . . under what conditions’ BI implementation interventions may work. . . . . . .
Read Full Text (PDF)
_________________________________________________________________
