Automating standard alcohol use assessment instruments via interactive voice response technology

James C. Mundt, Michael J. Bohn, Monica King, Michael T Hartley

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

32 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Interactive voice response (IVR) technology integrates touch-tone telephones with computer-automated data processing. IVR offers a convenient, efficient method for remote collection of self-report data. Methods: Twenty-six subjects recruited from an outpatient alcohol treatment center completed IVR and paper/pencil versions of a demographic and drinking history questionnaire, Stages of Change Readiness and Treatment Eagerness Scale, Drinker Inventory of Consequences, Obsessive-Compulsive Drinking Scale, Alcohol Dependence Scale, and two numerical rating scales of craving and desire to drink during the prior week. Administration of the instruments in both formats was repeated 1 week later. The order of administration method was counterbalanced between subjects and reversed across data collection sessions. Scale and subscale scores from both methods were correlated within sessions. Test-retest correlations were also calculated for each method. A criterion of α = 0.01 was used to control type I statistical error. Results: Intermethod correlations within each session were significant for all of the instruments administered. Test-retest correlations for both methods were also significant, except for the numerical ratings. Scores on the Alcohol Dependence Scale obtained via IVR were significantly lower than those collected by paper/pencil. Other differences between the data collection methods or across the sessions were inconsistent. The average IVR call length was 34 min and 23 sec. Paper/pencil forms required an average of 18 min and 38 sec to complete and an additional 10 min and 17 sec for data entry. Conclusions: IVR technology provides a convenient alternative to collecting self-report measures of treatment outcomes. Both paper/pencil and IVR assessments provide highly convergent data and demonstrate good test-retest reliability. Alcohol Dependence Scale score differences between methods highlight special considerations for IVR adaptation of existing paper/pencil instruments. Benefits of IVR include procedural standardization, automatic data scoring, direct electronic storage, and remote accessibility from multiple locations.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)207-211
Number of pages5
JournalAlcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research
Volume26
Issue number2
StatePublished - 2002
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Alcohols
Technology
Alcoholism
Self Report
Drinking
Telephone sets
Touch
Automatic Data Processing
Telephone
Reproducibility of Results
Standardization
Data acquisition
Outpatients
Demography
Equipment and Supplies
Therapeutics

Keywords

  • Alcoholism
  • Interactive Voice Response
  • IVR
  • Psychometrics
  • Telephone Assessment

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine (miscellaneous)
  • Toxicology

Cite this

Automating standard alcohol use assessment instruments via interactive voice response technology. / Mundt, James C.; Bohn, Michael J.; King, Monica; Hartley, Michael T.

In: Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, Vol. 26, No. 2, 2002, p. 207-211.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{1282a4e9b1c543baa76b9758b79ccce0,
title = "Automating standard alcohol use assessment instruments via interactive voice response technology",
abstract = "Background: Interactive voice response (IVR) technology integrates touch-tone telephones with computer-automated data processing. IVR offers a convenient, efficient method for remote collection of self-report data. Methods: Twenty-six subjects recruited from an outpatient alcohol treatment center completed IVR and paper/pencil versions of a demographic and drinking history questionnaire, Stages of Change Readiness and Treatment Eagerness Scale, Drinker Inventory of Consequences, Obsessive-Compulsive Drinking Scale, Alcohol Dependence Scale, and two numerical rating scales of craving and desire to drink during the prior week. Administration of the instruments in both formats was repeated 1 week later. The order of administration method was counterbalanced between subjects and reversed across data collection sessions. Scale and subscale scores from both methods were correlated within sessions. Test-retest correlations were also calculated for each method. A criterion of α = 0.01 was used to control type I statistical error. Results: Intermethod correlations within each session were significant for all of the instruments administered. Test-retest correlations for both methods were also significant, except for the numerical ratings. Scores on the Alcohol Dependence Scale obtained via IVR were significantly lower than those collected by paper/pencil. Other differences between the data collection methods or across the sessions were inconsistent. The average IVR call length was 34 min and 23 sec. Paper/pencil forms required an average of 18 min and 38 sec to complete and an additional 10 min and 17 sec for data entry. Conclusions: IVR technology provides a convenient alternative to collecting self-report measures of treatment outcomes. Both paper/pencil and IVR assessments provide highly convergent data and demonstrate good test-retest reliability. Alcohol Dependence Scale score differences between methods highlight special considerations for IVR adaptation of existing paper/pencil instruments. Benefits of IVR include procedural standardization, automatic data scoring, direct electronic storage, and remote accessibility from multiple locations.",
keywords = "Alcoholism, Interactive Voice Response, IVR, Psychometrics, Telephone Assessment",
author = "Mundt, {James C.} and Bohn, {Michael J.} and Monica King and Hartley, {Michael T}",
year = "2002",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "26",
pages = "207--211",
journal = "Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research",
issn = "0145-6008",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Automating standard alcohol use assessment instruments via interactive voice response technology

AU - Mundt, James C.

AU - Bohn, Michael J.

AU - King, Monica

AU - Hartley, Michael T

PY - 2002

Y1 - 2002

N2 - Background: Interactive voice response (IVR) technology integrates touch-tone telephones with computer-automated data processing. IVR offers a convenient, efficient method for remote collection of self-report data. Methods: Twenty-six subjects recruited from an outpatient alcohol treatment center completed IVR and paper/pencil versions of a demographic and drinking history questionnaire, Stages of Change Readiness and Treatment Eagerness Scale, Drinker Inventory of Consequences, Obsessive-Compulsive Drinking Scale, Alcohol Dependence Scale, and two numerical rating scales of craving and desire to drink during the prior week. Administration of the instruments in both formats was repeated 1 week later. The order of administration method was counterbalanced between subjects and reversed across data collection sessions. Scale and subscale scores from both methods were correlated within sessions. Test-retest correlations were also calculated for each method. A criterion of α = 0.01 was used to control type I statistical error. Results: Intermethod correlations within each session were significant for all of the instruments administered. Test-retest correlations for both methods were also significant, except for the numerical ratings. Scores on the Alcohol Dependence Scale obtained via IVR were significantly lower than those collected by paper/pencil. Other differences between the data collection methods or across the sessions were inconsistent. The average IVR call length was 34 min and 23 sec. Paper/pencil forms required an average of 18 min and 38 sec to complete and an additional 10 min and 17 sec for data entry. Conclusions: IVR technology provides a convenient alternative to collecting self-report measures of treatment outcomes. Both paper/pencil and IVR assessments provide highly convergent data and demonstrate good test-retest reliability. Alcohol Dependence Scale score differences between methods highlight special considerations for IVR adaptation of existing paper/pencil instruments. Benefits of IVR include procedural standardization, automatic data scoring, direct electronic storage, and remote accessibility from multiple locations.

AB - Background: Interactive voice response (IVR) technology integrates touch-tone telephones with computer-automated data processing. IVR offers a convenient, efficient method for remote collection of self-report data. Methods: Twenty-six subjects recruited from an outpatient alcohol treatment center completed IVR and paper/pencil versions of a demographic and drinking history questionnaire, Stages of Change Readiness and Treatment Eagerness Scale, Drinker Inventory of Consequences, Obsessive-Compulsive Drinking Scale, Alcohol Dependence Scale, and two numerical rating scales of craving and desire to drink during the prior week. Administration of the instruments in both formats was repeated 1 week later. The order of administration method was counterbalanced between subjects and reversed across data collection sessions. Scale and subscale scores from both methods were correlated within sessions. Test-retest correlations were also calculated for each method. A criterion of α = 0.01 was used to control type I statistical error. Results: Intermethod correlations within each session were significant for all of the instruments administered. Test-retest correlations for both methods were also significant, except for the numerical ratings. Scores on the Alcohol Dependence Scale obtained via IVR were significantly lower than those collected by paper/pencil. Other differences between the data collection methods or across the sessions were inconsistent. The average IVR call length was 34 min and 23 sec. Paper/pencil forms required an average of 18 min and 38 sec to complete and an additional 10 min and 17 sec for data entry. Conclusions: IVR technology provides a convenient alternative to collecting self-report measures of treatment outcomes. Both paper/pencil and IVR assessments provide highly convergent data and demonstrate good test-retest reliability. Alcohol Dependence Scale score differences between methods highlight special considerations for IVR adaptation of existing paper/pencil instruments. Benefits of IVR include procedural standardization, automatic data scoring, direct electronic storage, and remote accessibility from multiple locations.

KW - Alcoholism

KW - Interactive Voice Response

KW - IVR

KW - Psychometrics

KW - Telephone Assessment

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036173378&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0036173378&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 26

SP - 207

EP - 211

JO - Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research

JF - Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research

SN - 0145-6008

IS - 2

ER -