Jim McCambridge1, Bonnita A Thomas. 1. Centre for Research on Drugs and Health Behaviour, Department of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK. jim.mccambridge@lshtm.ac.uk
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) is under-studied among young drinkers, as are the contributions of individual items to total AUDIT scores, and online performance of the existing briefer versions of this instrument. DESIGN AND METHODS: This study examined individual items of the AUDIT, and various combinations, including the existing briefer versions, in relation to total AUDIT scores in a Web-based study of young drinkers. A total of 167 young people aged 16-24 years old who had consumed any alcohol within the previous 7 days were recruited by both offline and online methods. RESULTS: Considered individually, items 3, 4, 5 and 8 were predictive of the majority of the variance in total AUDIT scores in this Web-based study. Existing briefer versions of the AUDIT do not better predict total scores than possible alternative combinations of items, for which acceptable levels of sensitivity and specificity for screening have been demonstrated. CONCLUSIONS: Short forms of the AUDIT, particularly those based only on consumption questions, require further validation study in online applications with young people.
INTRODUCTION: The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) is under-studied among young drinkers, as are the contributions of individual items to total AUDIT scores, and online performance of the existing briefer versions of this instrument. DESIGN AND METHODS: This study examined individual items of the AUDIT, and various combinations, including the existing briefer versions, in relation to total AUDIT scores in a Web-based study of young drinkers. A total of 167 young people aged 16-24 years old who had consumed any alcohol within the previous 7 days were recruited by both offline and online methods. RESULTS: Considered individually, items 3, 4, 5 and 8 were predictive of the majority of the variance in total AUDIT scores in this Web-based study. Existing briefer versions of the AUDIT do not better predict total scores than possible alternative combinations of items, for which acceptable levels of sensitivity and specificity for screening have been demonstrated. CONCLUSIONS: Short forms of the AUDIT, particularly those based only on consumption questions, require further validation study in online applications with young people.
Authors: Kypros Kypri; Jim McCambridge; John A Cunningham; Tina Vater; Steve Bowe; Brandon De Graaf; John B Saunders; Johanna Dean Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2010-12-22 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Jessica Fraeyman; Paul Van Royen; Bart Vriesacker; Leen De Mey; Guido Van Hal Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2012-04-23 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Zarnie Khadjesari; Ian R White; Jim McCambridge; Louise Marston; Paul Wallace; Christine Godfrey; Elizabeth Murray Journal: Addict Sci Clin Pract Date: 2017-01-04