Jeffrey P Yaeger1, Megan A Moreno2. 1. a Department of Pediatrics , St. Christopher's Hospital for Children, Drexel University College of Medicine , Philadelphia , Pennsylvania , USA. 2. b Department of Pediatrics , University of Washington , Seattle , Washington , USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the reliability of longitudinally reporting age at first drink (AFD), and to test AFD and setting of first drink (SFD) as predictors of collegiate problem drinking. PARTICIPANTS: 338 first-year college students were interviewed multiple times during their first academic year, from May 2011 through August 2012. METHODS: AFD, SFD, and problem drinking were measured using the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) during the first year of college. Bivariate analysis and parsimonious multivariate linear regression model were conducted. RESULTS: 62% of respondents were inconsistent in reporting AFD over time. Social SFD was the strongest independent predictor for higher AUDIT scores (b = 4.74, 95% confidence interval; 1.91, 7.57; p = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest caution should be used in relying upon using AFD as a sole predictor of problem drinking. SFD may be a complementary measure to identify students at high risk of collegiate problem drinking.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the reliability of longitudinally reporting age at first drink (AFD), and to test AFD and setting of first drink (SFD) as predictors of collegiate problem drinking. PARTICIPANTS: 338 first-year college students were interviewed multiple times during their first academic year, from May 2011 through August 2012. METHODS:AFD, SFD, and problem drinking were measured using the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) during the first year of college. Bivariate analysis and parsimonious multivariate linear regression model were conducted. RESULTS: 62% of respondents were inconsistent in reporting AFD over time. Social SFD was the strongest independent predictor for higher AUDIT scores (b = 4.74, 95% confidence interval; 1.91, 7.57; p = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest caution should be used in relying upon using AFD as a sole predictor of problem drinking. SFD may be a complementary measure to identify students at high risk of collegiate problem drinking.
Entities:
Keywords:
Alcohol; clinical medicine; community health; health education
Authors: Meghan E Morean; Grace Kong; Deepa R Camenga; Dana A Cavallo; Christian Connell; Suchitra Krishnan-Sarin Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2014-09-24 Impact factor: 3.455