Robert Patton1, Sadie Boniface2. 1. School of Psychology, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7XH, UK r.patton@surrey.ac.uk. 2. Department of Addictions, King's College London, London SE5 8BB, UK.
Abstract
AIM: Most published research utilizes an AUDIT score of >8 as the threshold for hazardous drinking. Recent research suggests that this limit should be amended for younger drinkers (aged 18-35 years). This study aimed to explore the effect of a revision to AUDIT cut scores. METHOD: Applying Foxcroft et al.'s [(2015) Accuracy of Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test for detecting problem drinking in 18-35 year-olds in England: method comparison study. Alcohol Alcohol 50, 244-50] suggested cut off scores of nine for males and four for females to the most recent Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey (2007) data. RESULTS: This more than doubles the prevalence of female hazardous drinkers, and significantly increases the overall rate for that age group when compared with the standard threshold of >8. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of hazardous drinking among females ages 18-30 may be significantly higher than current estimates.
AIM: Most published research utilizes an AUDIT score of >8 as the threshold for hazardous drinking. Recent research suggests that this limit should be amended for younger drinkers (aged 18-35 years). This study aimed to explore the effect of a revision to AUDIT cut scores. METHOD: Applying Foxcroft et al.'s [(2015) Accuracy of Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test for detecting problem drinking in 18-35 year-olds in England: method comparison study. Alcohol Alcohol 50, 244-50] suggested cut off scores of nine for males and four for females to the most recent Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey (2007) data. RESULTS: This more than doubles the prevalence of female hazardous drinkers, and significantly increases the overall rate for that age group when compared with the standard threshold of >8. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of hazardous drinking among females ages 18-30 may be significantly higher than current estimates.
Authors: Jason Watterson; Belinda Gabbe; Paul Dietze; Jennifer Thompson; Michael Oborn; Jeffrey V Rosenfeld Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2017-05-02 Impact factor: 3.295