Yen-Tyng Chen1, Umedjon Ibragimov1, Eric J Nehl2, Tony Zheng3, Na He4, Frank Y Wong1. 1. Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, United States. 2. Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, United States. Electronic address: enehl@emory.edu. 3. Shanghai Piaoxue, Shanghai, China. 4. Department of Epidemiology, Fudan University School of Public Health, Shanghai, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Detection of heavy drinking among men who have sex with men (MSM) is crucial for both intervention and treatment. The CAGE questionnaire is a popular screening instrument for alcohol use problems. However, the validity of CAGE for Chinese MSM is unknown. METHOD: Data were from three waves of cross-sectional assessments among general MSM (n=523) and men who sell sex to other men ("money boys" or MBs, n=486) in Shanghai, China. Specifically, participants were recruited using respondent-driven, community popular opinion leader, and venue-based sampling methods. The validity of the CAGE was examined for different cutoff scores and individual CAGE items using self-reported heavy drinking (≥14 drinks in the past week) as a criterion. RESULTS: In the full sample, 75 (7.4%) of participants were classified as heavy drinkers. 32 (6.1%) of general MSM and 43 (8.9%) of MBs were heavy drinkers. The area under curve statistics for overall sample was 0.7 (95% CI: 0.36-0.77). Overall, the sensitivities (ranging from 18.7 to 66.7%), specificities (ranging from 67.5 to 95.8%), and positive predictive values (ranging from 14.1 to 26.4%) for different cutoff scores were inadequate using past week heavy drinking as the criterion. The ability of CAGE to discriminate heavy drinkers from non-heavy drinkers was limited. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings showed the inadequate validity of CAGE as a screening instrument for current heavy drinking in Chinese MSM. Further research using a combination of validity criteria is needed to determine the applicability of CAGE for this population.
BACKGROUND: Detection of heavy drinking among men who have sex with men (MSM) is crucial for both intervention and treatment. The CAGE questionnaire is a popular screening instrument for alcohol use problems. However, the validity of CAGE for Chinese MSM is unknown. METHOD: Data were from three waves of cross-sectional assessments among general MSM (n=523) and men who sell sex to other men ("money boys" or MBs, n=486) in Shanghai, China. Specifically, participants were recruited using respondent-driven, community popular opinion leader, and venue-based sampling methods. The validity of the CAGE was examined for different cutoff scores and individual CAGE items using self-reported heavy drinking (≥14 drinks in the past week) as a criterion. RESULTS: In the full sample, 75 (7.4%) of participants were classified as heavy drinkers. 32 (6.1%) of general MSM and 43 (8.9%) of MBs were heavy drinkers. The area under curve statistics for overall sample was 0.7 (95% CI: 0.36-0.77). Overall, the sensitivities (ranging from 18.7 to 66.7%), specificities (ranging from 67.5 to 95.8%), and positive predictive values (ranging from 14.1 to 26.4%) for different cutoff scores were inadequate using past week heavy drinking as the criterion. The ability of CAGE to discriminate heavy drinkers from non-heavy drinkers was limited. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings showed the inadequate validity of CAGE as a screening instrument for current heavy drinking in Chinese MSM. Further research using a combination of validity criteria is needed to determine the applicability of CAGE for this population.
Authors: Robert G Deiss; Jesse L Clark; Kelika A Konda; Segundo R Leon; Jeffrey D Klausner; Carlos F Caceres; Thomas J Coates Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2013-02-20 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: A L Wirtz; C E Zelaya; C Latkin; R Stall; A Peryshkina; N Galai; V Mogilniy; P Dzhigun; I Kostetskaya; C Beyrer Journal: AIDS Behav Date: 2016-03
Authors: Eric J Nehl; Na He; Lavinia Lin; Tony Zheng; Jessica A Harnisch; Yingying Ding; Frank Y Wong Journal: Subst Use Misuse Date: 2014-10-16 Impact factor: 2.164
Authors: Gabrielle G Grant; Audrey E Wolfe; Catherine R Thorpe; Nicole S Gibran; Gretchen J Carrougher; Shelley A Wiechman; Radha Holavanahalli; Frederick J Stoddard; Robert L Sheridan; Lewis E Kazis; Jeffrey C Schneider; Colleen M Ryan Journal: Burns Date: 2019-12-31 Impact factor: 2.609