Ralph Hingson · Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs 2014 · narrative review · n=?

New Research Findings Since the 2007 Surgeon General’s Call to Action to Prevent and Reduce Underage Drinking: A Review

Cited 155 times in the scientific literature.

Level 5 - mechanism / opinion, no new human data

Narrative literature review synthesizing post-2007 studies, meta-analyses, and policy evaluations without a formal systematic review protocol described in the abstract.

OpenAlex W2029271318 · doi:10.15288/jsad.2014.75.158 · record verified 2026-08-26

What was done

The authors conducted a review of new research reports, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews published after the 2007 U.S. Surgeon General's Call to Action to Prevent and Reduce Underage Drinking. The review examined trends in youth alcohol consumption and traffic fatalities, risk factors and consequences (such as early-onset drinking and cognitive effects), and the effectiveness of policy, individual, and community prevention interventions.

What was found

The abstract reports continued reductions in youth drinking frequency, heavy episodic drinking, and alcohol-related traffic fatalities since the minimum legal drinking age was set to 21. It identifies evidence supporting the effectiveness of policies such as the age-21 drinking limit, zero tolerance laws, higher alcohol pricing, use/lose laws, social host liability, graduated licensing, and nighttime driving restrictions. It also highlights positive findings for screening and brief motivational interventions, web-based and in-person social norms interventions, and multicomponent community programs. The abstract provides no specific quantitative effect sizes or numerical data.

Why it matters

This review compiles the multi-level evidence base supporting legal, environmental, and behavioral interventions that reduce underage alcohol use and related mortality.

Limits

The abstract describes a broad narrative synthesis rather than a systematic review with defined search protocols, risk of bias assessments, or study counts. No numerical estimates or confidence intervals are reported to quantify the magnitude of effect for the summarized interventions.

Cited by