While little has been published regarding the usefulness of the screening process itself as an intervention tool,5,40 we hypothesized that those who completed screening might have better outcomes than other groups of offenders. Screening programs for DWI offenders, such as the one described here, often contain key elements of brief interventions. They are conducted in nontreatment settings; are performed by providers who do not specialize in addiction treatment; and include assessment, feedback, and advice.24,40,41 Practitioners have recognized for many years that simply asking people about their drinking and its consequences can lead to reduced drinking.42 Our results show that those who did not complete screening had the highest rates of current SUDs at follow-up. They also had the highest utilization of treatment services. This may indicate these offenders were initially at higher risk than the other groups, had higher SUD severity, or had worse outcomes for other reasons unrelated to the screening process. Another plausible explanation is that the screening process may have benefitted the groups of offenders who completed it. Screening may have, for example, predisposed the low-risk, ‘not
