College DrinkingGANDRNCT04356261
Revolutionizing Normative Re-education
A study testing Gamified Personalized Normative Feedback in people with College Drinking and Underage Drinking, run by Loyola Marymount University at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Personalized Normative Feedback (PNF), the most widely-used college alcohol intervention approach, suffers from several limitations innovatively remedied in the current proposal through CampusGANDR, a smartphone-based app for college students that delivers alcohol-related PNF within a weekly game centered around… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 20 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- College Drinking, Underage Drinking, Alcohol Use Disorder
- What is being tested?
- Gamified Personalized Normative Feedback
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 1,143 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 15 Aug 2021to 25 Oct 2024
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 20 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult
Who may be able to join
None listed.
Who cannot join
- Not meeting inclusion criteria
- Unwillingness to participate (indicated by failure to accept Terms of Service \& Privacy Policy, or provide informed consent)
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Loyola Marymount University
Los Angeles, California, 90045
About this study
Official title: Revolutionizing Normative Re-education: Delivering Enhanced PNF Within a Social Media Inspired Game About College Life
Personalized Normative Feedback (PNF), the most widely-used college alcohol intervention approach, suffers from several limitations innovatively remedied in the current proposal through CampusGANDR, a smartphone-based app for college students that delivers alcohol-related PNF within a weekly game centered around testing first-year students' perceptions about the attitudes and behaviors of their peers in a variety of campus-relevant domains. Five pilot studies suggest that CampusGANDR will be significantly more effective at correcting students' normative misperceptions and reducing their alcohol use than standard PNF, especially among heavier-drinking students and those with greater exposure to alcohol on social media, and that these larger effects are driven by the significantly decreased psychological reactance experienced by students when viewing feedback as part of a game about college life rather than as part of an alcohol-focused program. The current project seeks to 1) evaluate the efficacy of CampusGANDR in a large-scale multi-site trial, 2) identify the optimal dosage of alcohol feedback to deliver within CampusGANDR for correcting norms and reducing alcohol use across 12 weeks of gameplay among non-drinking, moderate-drinking, and heavy-drinking students, 3) examine person-level moderators of these effects, and 4) evaluate CampusGANDR engagement and sustainability among students who play voluntarily but are not involved in the randomized controlled trial.
Read the detailed description
Despite concerted efforts, high risk drinking remains a significant problem on college campuses. Further, the transition into college is an identified critical period in which risky drinking patterns are often established and serious negative consequences occur. Colleges commonly employ Normative Re-Education (NR), a promising intervention approach focused on correcting over-estimated peer drinking norms, to reduce alcohol risk in first-year students. However, the most cost-effective and scalable NR intervention strategy, web-based personalized normative feedback (PNF), has yielded only modest reductions in drinking. Several issues have been identified that may explain these relatively small effects. For example, students often question the credibility of the normative data, the content fails to capture students' attention, and heavy drinkers often react to feedback defensively. These issues are not surprising as, unlike social media and digital gaming applications that capture and sustain young adults' attention, web-based PNF formats lack the sophisticated digital graphics, social interactivity, and other dynamic features to which students have become accustomed. Further, colleges often make participation mandatory or offer incentives to enroll students in current interventions, likely a detriment to student motivation and thus intervention effectiveness. CampusGANDR (Gamified Alcohol Norm Discovery and Re-education) addresses these issues by delivering alcohol PNF within a fun, gamified smartphone app that tests first-year students' perceptions of college life and classmates' attitudes and behaviors on a weekly basis across the first semester of college. Integrating features from popular social media platforms and evidence-based digital game mechanics (e.g., co-presence, a wager-based system of points, and chance-based uncertainty), CampusGANDR also features enhanced PNF and includes several novel features informed by longstanding cognitive and social psychological theories.
Based on extensive pilot work, the current proposal seeks to: 1) evaluate the efficacy of CampusGANDR in a large-scale multi-site randomized controlled trial (RCT); 2) identify the optimal dosage of alcohol feedback to deliver within CampusGANDR for correcting norms and reducing alcohol use among students who differ in alcohol use (non-drinkers, light to moderate drinkers, and heavy drinkers); 3) examine person-level moderators of intervention efficacy; and 4) evaluate CampusGANDR engagement and the sustainability of play among students who use the app but aren't recruited into the evaluation study (RCT).
Incoming first-year students at colleges and universities in California (Loyola Marymount University site) and Texas (University of Houston site) consecutive cohorts of first-year students will be invited to download the CampusGANDR app to test their perceptions of campus life compete against their classmates. Then, among students already playing CampusGANDR, a balanced sub-sample of 1,800 non-drinking, light/moderate drinking, and heavy drinking students will be invited to take part in an evaluation study (RCT). Study participants will play CampusGANDR over the initial 12 weeks of the fall semester and complete 4 surveys assessing their alcohol use, social media use, health behaviors, mental health, and adjustment to college. Study participants will be discretely randomized to receive alcohol feedback 0%, 33%, or 67% of weekly CampusGANDR rounds through a backend manipulation of chance elements. Students not meeting study eligibility criteria and those not electing to take part in the evaluation study will still take part in CampusGANDR. The dosage of alcohol feedback among these non-RCT players receive will be determined at random and their app usage data will be employed to assess app engagement and sustainability of play in the absence of study incentives. This project aims to culminate in a highly engaging, scalable, cutting-edge native smartphone app (IOS, Android) able to dynamically tailor the dosage of alcohol feedback delivered based on students' alcohol experience at the point of matriculation.
- Conditions
- College Drinking, Underage Drinking, Alcohol Use Disorder
- Being tested
- Gamified Personalized Normative Feedback
- Keywords
- Prevention, Social norms
- Medical subject headings
- Alcohol Drinking in College, Underage Drinking, Alcoholism
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Gamified Personalized Normative FeedbackBehavioural
Also called GANDR
Each week, all players will answer 3 questions of interest about first-year students' attitudes and behaviors (e.g., drinking, partying, exercising, studying, dorm life, etc.) generated by the student players. They will also guess how the typical same-sex student at their University answered the same questions and wager points on how close to the correct answer (group norm) each of their guesses is. Further, they will rate (e.g., thumbs up/thumbs down) the reported behaviors of other players and, then, submit and vote on questions for subsequent rounds. At the end of each week, players will receive enhanced personalized normative feedback feedback on two of the three questions, and receive feedback on how other students rated the answer they reported (preferred-sex injunctive norms).
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Control PNF | Placebo comparator | Personalized Normative Feedback on non-alcohol/health related topics delivered in all weekly rounds (active control) Receives: Behavioral: Gamified Personalized Normative Feedback |
| Light Dose of Alcohol PNF | Active comparator | Personalized Normative Feedback on Alcohol Use delivered in 33% of weekly rounds Receives: Behavioral: Gamified Personalized Normative Feedback |
| Heavy Dose of Alcohol PNF | Active comparator | Personalized Normative Feedback on Alcohol Use delivered in 67% of weekly rounds Receives: Behavioral: Gamified Personalized Normative Feedback |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change From Baseline Daily Drinking at 4 Months
The Daily Drinking Questionnaire assessess the number of drinks consumed per week in a typical week over the past three months.
Measured: baseline, 4 months
Change From Baseline Daily Drinking at 9 Months
The Daily Drinking Questionnaire assesses the number of drinks consumed per week in a typical week over the past three months.
Measured: baseline, 9 months
Change From Baseline Daily Drinking at 12 Months
Assesses number of drinks consumed during an average week over the past month
Measured: baseline, 12 months
Change From Baseline Alcohol Consequences at 4 Months
Young Adult Alcohol Consequences Questionnaire (YAACQ; Read et al., 2006) was used to assess alcohol-related negative consequences in the past month. Participants indicate whether or not they experienced each of 48 alcohol-related negative consequences in the past month (0 = no, 1 = yes). Items are summed to yield a total score reflecting the number of alcohol-related problems experienced. Scores range from 0 to 48, where higher scores indicate a greater number of alcohol-related negative consequences (worse outcome).
Measured: baseline, 4 months
Change From Baseline Alcohol Consequences at 9 Months
Young Adult Alcohol Consequences Questionnaire (YAACQ; Read et al., 2006) was used to assess alcohol-related negative consequences in the past month. Participants indicate whether or not they experienced each of 48 alcohol-related negative consequences in the past month (0 = no, 1 = yes). Items are summed to yield a total score reflecting the number of alcohol-related problems experienced. Scores range from 0 to 48, where higher scores indicate a greater number of alcohol-related negative consequences (worse outcome).
Measured: baseline, 9 months
Change From Baseline Alcohol Consequences at 12 Months
Young Adult Alcohol Consequences Questionnaire (YAACQ; Read et al., 2006) was used to assess alcohol-related negative consequences in the past month. Participants indicate whether or not they experienced each of 48 alcohol-related negative consequences in the past month (0 = no, 1 = yes). Items are summed to yield a total score reflecting the number of alcohol-related problems experienced. Scores range from 0 to 48, where higher scores indicate a greater number of alcohol-related negative consequences (worse outcome).
Measured: baseline, 12 months
Change From Baseline Quantity/Frequency/Peak Alcohol Use at 4 Months
We used the Quantity/Frequency/Peak Alcohol measure to assess peak drinks. Participants reported the largest number of drinks they consumed on one occasion in the past 30 days.
Measured: baseline, 4 months
Change From Baseline Quantity/Frequency/Peak Alcohol Use at 9 Months
Assesses frequency and quantity of alcohol consumption over the past month
Measured: baseline, 9 months
Change From Baseline Quantity/Frequency/Peak Alcohol Use at 12 Months
Assesses frequency and quantity of alcohol consumption over the past month
Measured: baseline, 12 months
Secondary outcomes (9)
Change From Baseline Descriptive Peer Drinking Norms- Drinking Norms Rating Form at 4 Months
Assesses perceptions of weekly alcohol consumption among peers over the past month
Measured: baseline, 4 months
Change From Baseline Descriptive Peer Drinking Norms- Drinking Norms Rating Form at 9 Months
Assesses perceptions of weekly alcohol consumption among peers over the past month
Measured: baseline, 9 months
Change From Baseline Descriptive Peer Drinking Norms- Drinking Norms Rating Form at 12 Months
Assesses perceptions of weekly alcohol consumption among peers over the past month
Measured: baseline, 12 months
Change From Baseline Descriptive Peer Drinking Norms- Modified Quantity, Frequency, Peak Index at 4 Months
Assesses perceptions of peers' frequency and quantity of drinking over the past month
Measured: baseline, 4 months
Change From Baseline Descriptive Peer Drinking Norms- Modified Quantity, Frequency, Peak Index at 9 Months
Assesses perceptions of peers' frequency and quantity of drinking over the past month
Measured: baseline, 9 months
Change From Baseline Descriptive Peer Drinking Norms- Modified Quantity, Frequency, Peak Index at 12 Months
Assesses perceptions of peers' frequency and quantity of drinking over the past month
Measured: baseline, 12 months
Change From Baseline Injunctive Peer Drinking Norms (Adapted From Baer, 1994) at 4 Months
Perceived Injunctive Norms scale was used to assess participants' estimates of how acceptable other same-sex students at their university find each of 15 drinking behaviors (e.g., drinking to get drunk, drinking alone, driving after drinking). Participants rate the acceptability of each behavior on a scale from 1 (completely unacceptable) to 7 (completely acceptable). Ratings are averaged across all 15 items to yield a total score ranging from 1 to 7, where higher scores indicate greater perceived peer approval of drinking behaviors.
Measured: baseline, 4 months
Change From Baseline Injunctive Peer Drinking Norms (Adapted From Baer, 1994) at 9 Months
Perceived Injunctive Norms scale was used to assess participants' estimates of how acceptable other same-sex students at their university find each of 15 drinking behaviors (e.g., drinking to get drunk, drinking alone, driving after drinking). Participants rate the acceptability of each behavior on a scale from 1 (completely unacceptable) to 7 (completely acceptable). Ratings are averaged across all 15 items to yield a total score ranging from 1 to 7, where higher scores indicate greater perceived peer approval of drinking behaviors.
Measured: baseline, 9 months
Change From Baseline Injunctive Peer Drinking Norms (Adapted From Baer, 1994) at 12 Months
Perceived Injunctive Norms scale was used to assess participants' estimates of how acceptable other same-sex students at their university find each of 15 drinking behaviors (e.g., drinking to get drunk, drinking alone, driving after drinking). Participants rate the acceptability of each behavior on a scale from 1 (completely unacceptable) to 7 (completely acceptable). Ratings are averaged across all 15 items to yield a total score ranging from 1 to 7, where higher scores indicate greater perceived peer approval of drinking behaviors; group-level data are summarized using the Mean (Measure Type) and SD (Dispersion Type).
Measured: baseline, 12 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted22 Apr 2020
- Study start15 Aug 2021
- Primary completion25 Oct 2024
- Study completion25 Oct 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Other trials for College DrinkingStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Based on condition assignment, participants could see up to 6 alcohol feedbacks (More Alcohol Feedback; MAF), up to 3 alcohol feedbacks (Less Alcohol Feedbacks; LAF) or 0 alcohol feedbacks (No Alcohol Feedback; NAF).
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 1,143 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Loyola Marymount University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- University of Houston
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04356261
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- LMU IRB 2019 SP 49-R
- Acronym
- GANDR
- Status last verified
- Mar 2026
- First submitted
- 9 Apr 2020
- Last updated
- 1 May 2026
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: Study results will be reported in aggregate, so that individual participants will not be identifiable in any research reports or presentations of the proposed study. A de-identified dataset will be made available to researchers 1 year after the initial publication of results. This dataset will include participant demographics and outcome measures assessed at baseline and the follow-up surveys. A data dictionary will be provided.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 1 May 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Revolutionizing Normative Re-education: Delivering Enhanced PNF Within a Social Media Inspired Game About College Life
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04356261
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- GANDR / LMU IRB 2019 SP 49-R
- Conditions
- College Drinking, Underage Drinking, Alcohol Use Disorder
- Keywords
- Prevention, Social norms
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 1,143 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Loyola Marymount UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- University of Houston
- Study start
- 15 Aug 2021 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 25 Oct 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 25 Oct 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 22 Apr 2020 (actual)
- Results
- Posted 1 May 2026
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Personalized Normative Feedback (PNF), the most widely-used college alcohol intervention approach, suffers from several limitations innovatively remedied in the current proposal through CampusGANDR, a smartphone-based app for college students that delivers alcohol-related PNF within a weekly game centered around testing first-year students' perceptions about the attitudes and behaviors of their peers in a variety of campus-relevant domains. Five pilot studies suggest that CampusGANDR will be significantly more effective at correcting students' normative misperceptions and reducing their alcohol use than standard PNF, especially among heavier-drinking students and those with greater exposure to alcohol on social media, and that these larger effects are driven by the significantly decreased psychological reactance experienced by students when viewing feedback as part of a game about college life rather than as part of an alcohol-focused program. The current project seeks to 1) evaluate the efficacy of CampusGANDR in a large-scale multi-site trial, 2) identify the optimal dosage of alcohol feedback to deliver within CampusGANDR for correcting norms and reducing alcohol use across 12 weeks of gameplay among non-drinking, moderate-drinking, and heavy-drinking students, 3) examine person-level moderators of these effects, and 4) evaluate CampusGANDR engagement and sustainability among students who play voluntarily but are not involved in the randomized controlled trial.
Detailed description
Despite concerted efforts, high risk drinking remains a significant problem on college campuses. Further, the transition into college is an identified critical period in which risky drinking patterns are often established and serious negative consequences occur. Colleges commonly employ Normative Re-Education (NR), a promising intervention approach focused on correcting over-estimated peer drinking norms, to reduce alcohol risk in first-year students. However, the most cost-effective and scalable NR intervention strategy, web-based personalized normative feedback (PNF), has yielded only modest reductions in drinking. Several issues have been identified that may explain these relatively small effects. For example, students often question the credibility of the normative data, the content fails to capture students' attention, and heavy drinkers often react to feedback defensively. These issues are not surprising as, unlike social media and digital gaming applications that capture and sustain young adults' attention, web-based PNF formats lack the sophisticated digital graphics, social interactivity, and other dynamic features to which students have become accustomed. Further, colleges often make participation mandatory or offer incentives to enroll students in current interventions, likely a detriment to student motivation and thus intervention effectiveness. CampusGANDR (Gamified Alcohol Norm Discovery and Re-education) addresses these issues by delivering alcohol PNF within a fun, gamified smartphone app that tests first-year students' perceptions of college life and classmates' attitudes and behaviors on a weekly basis across the first semester of college. Integrating features from popular social media platforms and evidence-based digital game mechanics (e.g., co-presence, a wager-based system of points, and chance-based uncertainty), CampusGANDR also features enhanced PNF and includes several novel features informed by longstanding cognitive and social psychological theories.
Based on extensive pilot work, the current proposal seeks to: 1) evaluate the efficacy of CampusGANDR in a large-scale multi-site randomized controlled trial (RCT); 2) identify the optimal dosage of alcohol feedback to deliver within CampusGANDR for correcting norms and reducing alcohol use among students who differ in alcohol use (non-drinkers, light to moderate drinkers, and heavy drinkers); 3) examine person-level moderators of intervention efficacy; and 4) evaluate CampusGANDR engagement and the sustainability of play among students who use the app but aren't recruited into the evaluation study (RCT).
Incoming first-year students at colleges and universities in California (Loyola Marymount University site) and Texas (University of Houston site) consecutive cohorts of first-year students will be invited to download the CampusGANDR app to test their perceptions of campus life compete against their classmates. Then, among students already playing CampusGANDR, a balanced sub-sample of 1,800 non-drinking, light/moderate drinking, and heavy drinking students will be invited to take part in an evaluation study (RCT). Study participants will play CampusGANDR over the initial 12 weeks of the fall semester and complete 4 surveys assessing their alcohol use, social media use, health behaviors, mental health, and adjustment to college. Study participants will be discretely randomized to receive alcohol feedback 0%, 33%, or 67% of weekly CampusGANDR rounds through a backend manipulation of chance elements. Students not meeting study eligibility criteria and those not electing to take part in the evaluation study will still take part in CampusGANDR. The dosage of alcohol feedback among these non-RCT players receive will be determined at random and their app usage data will be employed to assess app engagement and sustainability of play in the absence of study incentives. This project aims to culminate in a highly engaging, scalable, cutting-edge native smartphone app (IOS, Android) able to dynamically tailor the dosage of alcohol feedback delivered based on students' alcohol experience at the point of matriculation.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 3
- Model description
- Based on condition assignment, participants could see up to 6 alcohol feedbacks (More Alcohol Feedback; MAF), up to 3 alcohol feedbacks (Less Alcohol Feedbacks; LAF) or 0 alcohol feedbacks (No Alcohol Feedback; NAF).
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Control PNF | Placebo comparator | Behavioral: Gamified Personalized Normative FeedbackPersonalized Normative Feedback on non-alcohol/health related topics delivered in all weekly rounds (active control) |
| Light Dose of Alcohol PNF | Active comparator | Behavioral: Gamified Personalized Normative FeedbackPersonalized Normative Feedback on Alcohol Use delivered in 33% of weekly rounds |
| Heavy Dose of Alcohol PNF | Active comparator | Behavioral: Gamified Personalized Normative FeedbackPersonalized Normative Feedback on Alcohol Use delivered in 67% of weekly rounds |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 20 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (0 listed)
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Not meeting inclusion criteria
- Unwillingness to participate (indicated by failure to accept Terms of Service \& Privacy Policy, or provide informed consent)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Gamified Personalized Normative FeedbackAlso: GANDREach week, all players will answer 3 questions of interest about first-year students' attitudes and behaviors (e.g., drinking, partying, exercising, studying, dorm life, etc.) generated by the student players. They will also guess how the typical same-sex student at their University answered the same questions and wager points on how close to the correct answer (group norm) each of their guesses is. Further, they will rate (e.g., thumbs up/thumbs down) the reported behaviors of other players and, then, submit and vote on questions for subsequent rounds. At the end of each week, players will receive enhanced personalized normative feedback feedback on two of the three questions, and receive feedback on how other students rated the answer they reported (preferred-sex injunctive norms). | Behavioural | Control PNF, Heavy Dose of Alcohol PNF, Light Dose of Alcohol PNF |
Primary outcome
Change From Baseline Daily Drinking at 4 Months
Time frame: baseline, 4 months
The Daily Drinking Questionnaire assessess the number of drinks consumed per week in a typical week over the past three months.
Change From Baseline Daily Drinking at 9 Months
Time frame: baseline, 9 months
The Daily Drinking Questionnaire assesses the number of drinks consumed per week in a typical week over the past three months.
Change From Baseline Daily Drinking at 12 Months
Time frame: baseline, 12 months
Assesses number of drinks consumed during an average week over the past month
Change From Baseline Alcohol Consequences at 4 Months
Time frame: baseline, 4 months
Young Adult Alcohol Consequences Questionnaire (YAACQ; Read et al., 2006) was used to assess alcohol-related negative consequences in the past month. Participants indicate whether or not they experienced each of 48 alcohol-related negative consequences in the past month (0 = no, 1 = yes). Items are summed to yield a total score reflecting the number of alcohol-related problems experienced. Scores range from 0 to 48, where higher scores indicate a greater number of alcohol-related negative consequences (worse outcome).
Change From Baseline Alcohol Consequences at 9 Months
Time frame: baseline, 9 months
Young Adult Alcohol Consequences Questionnaire (YAACQ; Read et al., 2006) was used to assess alcohol-related negative consequences in the past month. Participants indicate whether or not they experienced each of 48 alcohol-related negative consequences in the past month (0 = no, 1 = yes). Items are summed to yield a total score reflecting the number of alcohol-related problems experienced. Scores range from 0 to 48, where higher scores indicate a greater number of alcohol-related negative consequences (worse outcome).
Change From Baseline Alcohol Consequences at 12 Months
Time frame: baseline, 12 months
Young Adult Alcohol Consequences Questionnaire (YAACQ; Read et al., 2006) was used to assess alcohol-related negative consequences in the past month. Participants indicate whether or not they experienced each of 48 alcohol-related negative consequences in the past month (0 = no, 1 = yes). Items are summed to yield a total score reflecting the number of alcohol-related problems experienced. Scores range from 0 to 48, where higher scores indicate a greater number of alcohol-related negative consequences (worse outcome).
Change From Baseline Quantity/Frequency/Peak Alcohol Use at 4 Months
Time frame: baseline, 4 months
We used the Quantity/Frequency/Peak Alcohol measure to assess peak drinks. Participants reported the largest number of drinks they consumed on one occasion in the past 30 days.
Change From Baseline Quantity/Frequency/Peak Alcohol Use at 9 Months
Time frame: baseline, 9 months
Assesses frequency and quantity of alcohol consumption over the past month
Change From Baseline Quantity/Frequency/Peak Alcohol Use at 12 Months
Time frame: baseline, 12 months
Assesses frequency and quantity of alcohol consumption over the past month
9 secondary outcomes
Change From Baseline Descriptive Peer Drinking Norms- Drinking Norms Rating Form at 4 Months
Time frame: baseline, 4 months
Change From Baseline Descriptive Peer Drinking Norms- Drinking Norms Rating Form at 9 Months
Time frame: baseline, 9 months
Change From Baseline Descriptive Peer Drinking Norms- Drinking Norms Rating Form at 12 Months
Time frame: baseline, 12 months
Change From Baseline Descriptive Peer Drinking Norms- Modified Quantity, Frequency, Peak Index at 4 Months
Time frame: baseline, 4 months
Change From Baseline Descriptive Peer Drinking Norms- Modified Quantity, Frequency, Peak Index at 9 Months
Time frame: baseline, 9 months
Change From Baseline Descriptive Peer Drinking Norms- Modified Quantity, Frequency, Peak Index at 12 Months
Time frame: baseline, 12 months
Change From Baseline Injunctive Peer Drinking Norms (Adapted From Baer, 1994) at 4 Months
Time frame: baseline, 4 months
Change From Baseline Injunctive Peer Drinking Norms (Adapted From Baer, 1994) at 9 Months
Time frame: baseline, 9 months
Change From Baseline Injunctive Peer Drinking Norms (Adapted From Baer, 1994) at 12 Months
Time frame: baseline, 12 months
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 1 May 2026.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. Study results will be reported in aggregate, so that individual participants will not be identifiable in any research reports or presentations of the proposed study. A de-identified dataset will be made available to researchers 1 year after the initial publication of results. This dataset will include participant demographics and outcome measures assessed at baseline and the follow-up surveys. A data dictionary will be provided.
Related trials for College Drinking
Recruiting
Momentary Coping Prompts and Hair Steroids in College Students
Emotional Regulation, Alcohol Drinking in College
Recruiting
Just-in-Time Coping Prompts for Reactive Digital Behavior in College Students
Emotional Regulation, Alcohol Drinking in College
Recruiting
Centering Gender Affirming Resources in Higher Education
Sexual Violence, Drinking Heavy
Active, not recruiting
uSafeUS+ App Pilot Testing
Alcohol Consumption, Sexual Assault
Recruiting
Greek Connections Study
Heavy Episodic Drinking, Problem Drinking
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Gamified Personalized Normative Feedback in people with College Drinking and Underage Drinking, run by Loyola Marymount University at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 0 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 1 May 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 1 May 2026). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change From Baseline Daily Drinking at 4 Months (time frame: baseline, 4 months). The study lists 9 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 1 May 2026.