James G Linakis1, Julie R Bromberg2, T Charles Casper3, Thomas H Chun1, Michael J Mello2, Hailey Ingebretsen3, Anthony Spirito4. 1. The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Emergency Medicine, Providence, RI; The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Pediatrics, Providence, RI; Rhode Island Hospital, Emergency Medicine, Providence, RI. 2. The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Emergency Medicine, Providence, RI; Rhode Island Hospital, Emergency Medicine, Providence, RI. 3. University of Utah, Pediatrics, Salt Lake City, UT. 4. The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Providence, RI.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the test-retest reliability, concurrent, convergent, and discriminant validity of a recently devised screen (the Newton screen) for alcohol and cannabis use/misuse, and its predictive validity at follow-up. STUDY DESIGN: Adolescents, 12-17 years old (n = 4898), treated in 1 of 16 participating pediatric emergency departments across the US were enrolled in a study as part of a larger study within the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network. Concurrent and predictive validity (at 1, 2, and 3 years of follow-up) were assessed in a random subsample with a structured Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-based interview. Convergent validity was assessed with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification, a widely used alcohol screening measure. RESULTS: The sensitivity of the Newton screen for alcohol use disorder at baseline was 78.3% with a specificity of 93.0%. The cannabis use question had a baseline sensitivity of 93.1% and specificity of 93.5% for cannabis use disorder. Predictive validity analyses at 1, 2, and 3 years revealed high specificity but low sensitivity for alcohol and high specificity and moderate sensitivity for cannabis. CONCLUSIONS: The Newton screening instrument may be an appropriate brief screening tool for use in the busy clinical environment. Specificity was high for both alcohol and cannabis, but sensitivity was higher for cannabis than alcohol. Like other brief screens, more detailed follow-up questions may be necessary to definitively assess substance misuse risk and the need for referral to treatment.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the test-retest reliability, concurrent, convergent, and discriminant validity of a recently devised screen (the Newton screen) for alcohol and cannabis use/misuse, and its predictive validity at follow-up. STUDY DESIGN: Adolescents, 12-17 years old (n = 4898), treated in 1 of 16 participating pediatric emergency departments across the US were enrolled in a study as part of a larger study within the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network. Concurrent and predictive validity (at 1, 2, and 3 years of follow-up) were assessed in a random subsample with a structured Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-based interview. Convergent validity was assessed with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification, a widely used alcohol screening measure. RESULTS: The sensitivity of the Newton screen for alcohol use disorder at baseline was 78.3% with a specificity of 93.0%. The cannabis use question had a baseline sensitivity of 93.1% and specificity of 93.5% for cannabis use disorder. Predictive validity analyses at 1, 2, and 3 years revealed high specificity but low sensitivity for alcohol and high specificity and moderate sensitivity for cannabis. CONCLUSIONS: The Newton screening instrument may be an appropriate brief screening tool for use in the busy clinical environment. Specificity was high for both alcohol and cannabis, but sensitivity was higher for cannabis than alcohol. Like other brief screens, more detailed follow-up questions may be necessary to definitively assess substance misuse risk and the need for referral to treatment.
Authors: Fahd A Ahmad; Philip R O Payne; Ian Lackey; Rachel Komeshak; Kenneth Kenney; Brianna Magnusen; Christopher Metts; Thomas Bailey Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2020-02-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: James G Linakis; Sarah A Thomas; Julie R Bromberg; T Charles Casper; Thomas H Chun; Michael J Mello; Rachel Richards; Fahd Ahmad; Lalit Bajaj; Kathleen M Brown; Lauren S Chernick; Daniel M Cohen; J Michael Dean; Joel Fein; Timothy Horeczko; Michael N Levas; B McAninch; Michael C Monuteaux; Colette C Mull; Jackie Grupp-Phelan; Elizabeth C Powell; Alexander Rogers; Rohit P Shenoi; Brian Suffoletto; Cheryl Vance; Anthony Spirito Journal: Subst Abus Date: 2021-07-08 Impact factor: 3.716