Literature DB >> 18482414

What did you drink yesterday? Public health relevance of a recent recall method used in the 2004 Australian National Drug Strategy Household Survey.

Tim Stockwell1, Jinhui Zhao, Tanya Chikritzhs, Tom K Greenfield.   

Abstract

AIM: To (i) compare the Yesterday method with other methods of assessing alcohol use applied in the 2004 Australian National Drug Strategy Household Survey (NDSHS) in terms of extent of under-reporting of actual consumption assessed from sales data; and (ii) illustrate applications of the Yesterday method as a means of variously measuring the size of an Australian 'standard drink', the extent of risky/high-risk alcohol use, unrecorded alcohol consumption and beverage-specific patterns of risk in the general population.
SETTING: The homes of respondents who were eligible and willing to participate. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 24 109 Australians aged 12 years and over.
DESIGN: The 2004 NDSHS assessed drug use, experiences and attitudes using a 'drop and collect' self-completion questionnaire with random sampling and geographic (State and Territory) and demographic (age and gender) stratification. MEASURES: Self-completion questionnaire using quantity-frequency (QF) and graduated-frequency (GF) methods plus two questions about consumption 'yesterday': one in standard drinks, another with empirically based estimates of drink size and strength.
RESULTS: The Yesterday method yielded an estimate of 12.8 g as the amount of ethanol in a typical Australian standard drink (versus the official 10 g). Estimated coverage of the 2003-04 age 12+ years per-capita alcohol consumption in Australia (9.33 ml of ethanol) was 69.17% for GF and 64.63% for the QF when assuming a 12.8 g standard drink. Highest coverage of 80.71% was achieved by the detailed Yesterday method. The detailed Yesterday method found that 60.1% of Australian alcohol consumption was above low-risk guidelines; 81.5% for 12-17-year-olds, 84.8% for 18-24-year-olds and 88.8% for Indigenous respondents. Spirit-based drinks and regular strength beer were most likely to be drunk in this way, low- and mid-strength beer least likely.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared to more widely used methods, the Yesterday method minimizes under-reporting of overall consumption and provides unique data of public health significance. It also provides an empirical basis for taxing alcoholic beverages in accordance with their contributions to harm and can be used to complement individual-level measures such as QF and GF.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18482414      PMCID: PMC2782945          DOI: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008.02219.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Addiction        ISSN: 0965-2140            Impact factor:   6.526


  15 in total

1.  The Northern Territory's cask wine levy: health and taxation policy implications.

Authors:  D Gray; T Chikritzhs; T Stockwell
Journal:  Aust N Z J Public Health       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 2.939

2.  Non-response in alcohol and drug surveys: a research topic in need of further attention.

Authors:  R Caetano
Journal:  Addiction       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 6.526

3.  Problems with the graduated frequency approach to measuring alcohol consumption: results from a pilot study in Toronto, Canada.

Authors:  Kathryn Graham; Andrée Demers; Jürgen Rehm; Gerhard Gmel
Journal:  Alcohol Alcohol       Date:  2004-08-02       Impact factor: 2.826

4.  Under-reporting of alcohol consumption in household surveys: a comparison of quantity-frequency, graduated-frequency and recent recall.

Authors:  Tim Stockwell; Susan Donath; Mark Cooper-Stanbury; Tanya Chikritzhs; Paul Catalano; Cid Mateo
Journal:  Addiction       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 6.526

5.  Measuring alcohol consumption--should the 'graduated frequency' approach become the norm in survey research?

Authors:  Gerhard Gmel; Kathryn Graham; Hervé Kuendig; Sandra Kuntsche
Journal:  Addiction       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 6.526

Review 6.  Interventions to reduce harm associated with adolescent substance use.

Authors:  J W Toumbourou; T Stockwell; C Neighbors; G A Marlatt; J Sturge; J Rehm
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2007-04-21       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  A drink is a drink? Variation in the amount of alcohol contained in beer, wine and spirits drinks in a US methodological sample.

Authors:  William C Kerr; Thomas K Greenfield; Jennifer Tujague; Stephan E Brown
Journal:  Alcohol Clin Exp Res       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 3.455

8.  Volume of ethanol consumption: effects of different approaches to measurement.

Authors:  D A Dawson
Journal:  J Stud Alcohol       Date:  1998-03

9.  Ways of measuring drinking patterns and the difference they make: experience with graduated frequencies.

Authors:  T K Greenfield
Journal:  J Subst Abuse       Date:  2000

Review 10.  Towards agreement on ways to measure and report drinking patterns and alcohol-related problems in adult general population surveys: the Skarpö conference overview.

Authors:  D A Dawson; R Room
Journal:  J Subst Abuse       Date:  2000
View more
  33 in total

1.  Not all drinks are created equal: implications for alcohol assessment in India.

Authors:  Madhabika B Nayak; William Kerr; Thomas K Greenfield; Aravind Pillai
Journal:  Alcohol Alcohol       Date:  2008-10-01       Impact factor: 2.826

2.  Readiness to change and gender: Moderators of the relationship between social desirability and college drinking.

Authors:  Dawn W Foster
Journal:  J Alcohol Drug Depend       Date:  2013

3.  Minimum alcohol prices and outlet densities in British Columbia, Canada: estimated impacts on alcohol-attributable hospital admissions.

Authors:  Tim Stockwell; Jinhui Zhao; Gina Martin; Scott Macdonald; Kate Vallance; Andrew Treno; William Ponicki; Andrew Tu; Jane Buxton
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2013-04-18       Impact factor: 9.308

4.  Adjustments for drink size and ethanol content: new results from a self-report diary and transdermal sensor validation study.

Authors:  Jason C Bond; Thomas K Greenfield; Deidre Patterson; William C Kerr
Journal:  Alcohol Clin Exp Res       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 3.455

Review 5.  Understanding standard drinks and drinking guidelines.

Authors:  William C Kerr; Tim Stockwell
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Rev       Date:  2011-11-03

6.  Alcohol consumption and liver disease in Australia: a time series analysis of the period 1935-2006.

Authors:  Heng Jiang; Michael Livingston; Robin Room; Paul Dietze; Thor Norström; William C Kerr
Journal:  Alcohol Alcohol       Date:  2013-09-19       Impact factor: 2.826

7.  Recall bias across 7 days in self-reported alcohol consumption prior to injury among emergency department patients.

Authors:  Cheryl J Cherpitel; Yu Ye; Tim Stockwell; Kate Vallance; Clifton Chow
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Rev       Date:  2017-05-03

Review 8.  A systematic review and meta-analysis of alcohol consumption and injury risk as a function of study design and recall period.

Authors:  Cornelia Zeisser; Tim R Stockwell; Tanya Chikritzhs; Cheryl Cherpitel; Yu Ye; Christian Gardner
Journal:  Alcohol Clin Exp Res       Date:  2012-08-30       Impact factor: 3.455

9.  An adaptation of the Yesterday Method to correct for under-reporting of alcohol consumption and estimate compliance with Canadian low-risk drinking guidelines.

Authors:  Jinhui Zhao; Tim Stockwell; Gerald Thomas
Journal:  Can J Public Health       Date:  2015-04-29

10.  The Mechanisms of Alcohol Control.

Authors:  Christopher S Carpenter; Carlos Dobkin; Casey Warman
Journal:  J Hum Resour       Date:  2015-11-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.