Table 2 The outcome data of the included studies

Aharonovich 2017 [19]

Frequency (IRR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.41–1.07).

Quantity (IRR = 0.63 (95% CI = 0.36–1.11)

–

–

–

–

–

Chander 2015 [35]

Less likely to have a drinking day (OR 0.42 (95% CI 0.23–0.75) (p = 0.005).

90-day drinking frequency in the intervention group was 4.6 [95% CI 0.9, 7.1]

Intervention effect 2.9 [95% CI 0.8, 4.4]

Odds ratio 1.30 95% CI 0.65–2.61).

–

(OR 1.11 95% CI (0.853, 1.447) (p = .43)).

No diff.

Odds of having unprotected vaginal sex compared with the usual care group (AOR = 0.386 with 95% CI (0.156, 0.952), p = 0.041)

–

Dawson-Rose 2017 [40]

− 1.59 (95% CI − 2.19, − 1.00)

–

–

–

–

–

Gilbert 2008 [25]

Any drinking at 3 months RR 0.84 (0.651, 1.080) p = 0.172

Any drinking at 6 months RR 0.87 (0.666, 1.130) p = 0.291

Risk of drinking at 3 month RR 0.88 (0.628, 1.220) p = 0.432

Risk of drinking at 6 months

0.85 (0.606, 1.191) p = 0.343

–

–

–

Unprotected sex (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.773, 0.993, p = 0.039 at 3 months; and RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.686, 0.941, p = 0.007 at 6 months)

–

Hasin 2013 [26]

χ², d.f. = 9.11,2, p = 0.01)

–

–

–

–

–

Kahler 2018 [32]

Quantity of alcohol use

Cohen’s d − 5.0 p < .001 at 6 months and − 3.3 p < 0.04 at 12 months

Frequency

d = −.42 p < 01 and .40 p < .01 at 12 months

d = .02 p = .99 at 6 months and d = − .11 p = .72 at 12 months

d = −.25 p = .08 at 6 months and d = −.21 p = .15 at 12 months

–

Condomless sex d = −.08 p = .79 at 6 months and d = −.19 p = .10

Sex under influence

d = −.04 p = .20 at 6 months and d = −.09 p = .11 at 6 months

–

Meade 2010 [28]

Quantity (Wald χ²(4) = 10.77, p < .05)

–

–

–

–

–

Naar-King 2008 [39]

t(48) = 1.65, p = .05

t(45) = 1.91, p = .03

–

t(47) = .53, p = .30

–

Papas 2011 [27]

Percentage daily drinking (d = .95, p = .0002, mean difference = 24.93 (95% CI 12.43, 37.43)

Drinks per drinking day (d = .76, p = .002, mean difference = 2.88 (95% CI 1.05, 4.70)

–

–

–

–

–

Parsons 2007 [29]

Standard drinks from baseline to 3 months [F(1, 112) = 62.7; p < 0.001]

6-month follow-up [F(1, 93) = 48.7; p < 0.001]

(OR = 2.7; p = 0.03)

[F(1, 115) = 6.44; p < 0.02]

OR = 3.4; p = 0.013)

Percent dose adherence [F(1, 107) = 13.5; p < 0.001]

[F(1, 111) = 21.9; p < 0.001]

–

–

Rongkavilit 2013 [41]

Frequency S = − 0.64, p = 0.52

S = − 0.84, p = 0.40

Quantity S = − 0.33, p = 0.74

S = − 0.79, p = 0.43

t = 0.75, p = 0.47

t = − 0.14, p = 0.89

–

S = − 0.85, p = 0.40

S = − 0.71, p = 0.48

–

Condom use t = − 0.87, p = 0.39

t = − 1.92, p = 0.06

Avoiding multiple partners

t = − 1.00, p = 0.32

t = − 1.64, p = 0.11

HIV disclosure to partners t = − 0.18, p = 0.86

t = − 0.83, p = 0.41

Rotheram-Borus 2012 [36]

t = − 3.46, df = 256, p < 0.01

63% had an undetectable viral load

–

Adherence 76%

–

–

Samet 2005 [30]

No effect on frequency, quantity

p > 0.25

No effect

p > 0.25

No effect p > 0.25

No effect

p > 0.25

–

–

Samet 2015 [42]

Quantity OR 1.05 (0.77, 1.43)p = 0.76

AOR 1.04 (0.77, 1.40)

p = 0.80

Frequency OR 1.00 (0.72, 1.40)

p = 0.98

AOR 1.00 (0.72, 1.39)

p = 1.00

Needle sharing OR 1.12 (0.75, 1.69) p = 0.58

AOR 1.13 (0.74, 1.73)

p = 0.56

Distributive needle sharing OR 1.18 (0.75, 1.86) p = 0.47

AOR 1.20 (0.76, 1.91)

p = 0.43

–

–

STI OR 0.65 (0.35, 1.19) p = 0.16

AOR 0.63 (0.34, 1.18) p = 0.15

Decrease in unprotected sex OR 0.91 (0.69, 1.20

p = 0.50

AOR 0.91 (0.69, 1.20)

p = 0.51

–

Sikkema 2011 [34]

Mean diff. (MD Interv.0.17) (MD Control 0.04 (0.13)

–

–

62.1% at baseline and 57.1% at 6 months

MD 0.16 (− 0.28) 0.44

–

Velasquez 2009 [33]

(Odds ratio [OR] = 1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.02–1.86)

Higher number of heavy drinking days per 30-day period by a factor of 1.5 (OR = 1.5; 95% CI = 1.08–2.10)

–

–

–

χ²(33, N = 216) = 67.5, p < .001

2.19 (OR = 2.19; 95% CI = 1.17–4.11).

–

Wandera 2017 [43]

Mean AUDIT-C difference of the differences = − 0.07, 95% CI − 0.70–0.56, p = 0.8266

–

–

–

–

–

Weiss 2011 [37]

Miami Alcohol Use Questionnaire

(F[2486] = 3.39, p < 0.05)

Reduction significant (p < 0.01)

–

(t[44] = 3.08, p < 0.01)

(p < 0.05)

Wong 2008 [31]

(t = − 15.4, df = 935, p < 0.0001)

(alcohol and marijuana)

–

–

–

–

–

Liu YU 2018 [44]

23 to 9% (p = 0.001)

–

–

–

50 to 16% (p < 0.001)

–

Zule 2014 [38]

(Odds ratio [OR] = 3.61; 95% confidence intervals [CI] = 1.23, 11.70; p = 0.016)

–

–

–

–

–