James H Conigrave1,2, K S Kylie Lee1,2,3, Catherine Zheng1,2, Scott Wilson1,2,4, Jimmy Perry4, Tanya Chikritzhs5, Tim Slade6, Kirsten Morley1, Robin Room3, Sarah Callinan3, Noel Hayman7,8,9, Katherine M Conigrave1,2,10. 1. Discipline of Addiction Medicine, Central Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, NSW, Australia. 2. NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Indigenous Health and Alcohol, Camperdown, NSW, Australia. 3. Centre for Alcohol Policy Research, La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC, Australia. 4. Aboriginal Drug and Alcohol Council Inc South Australia, SA, Australia. 5. National Drug Research Institute, Curtin University, Health Sciences, WA, Australia. 6. The Matilda Centre for Research in Mental Health and Substance Use, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, NSW, Australia. 7. Southern Queensland Centre of Excellence in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Primary Health Care, Queensland Health, QLD, Australia. 8. School of Medicine, Griffith University, QLD, Australia. 9. School of Medicine, University of Queensland, QLD, Australia. 10. Drug Health Services, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney Local Health District, NSW, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: To reduce health and social inequities, it is important to understand how drinking patterns vary within and between Indigenous peoples. We aimed to assess variability in estimates of Indigenous Australian drinking patterns and to identify demographic and methodological factors associated with this. DESIGN: A three-level meta-analysis of Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ('Indigenous') drinking patterns [International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) no. CRD42018103209]. SETTING: Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Indigenous Australians. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcomes extracted were drinking status, single-occasion risk and life-time risk. Moderation analysis was performed to identify potential sources of heterogeneity. Moderators included gender, age, socio-economic status, local alcohol restrictions, sample population, remoteness, Australian state or territory, publication year, Indigenous involvement in survey design or delivery and cultural adaptations. FINDINGS: A systematic review of the literature revealed 41 eligible studies. For all primary outcomes, considerable heterogeneity was identified within ( I 2 2 = 51.39-68.80%) and between ( I 3 2 = 29.27-47.36%) samples. The pooled proportions (P) of current drinkers [P = 0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.53-0.65], single-occasion (P = 0.34, 95% CI = 0.24-0.44) and life-time (P = 0.21, 95% CI = 0.15-0.29) risk were all moderated by gender, age, remoteness and measurement tool. Reference period moderated proportions of participants at single-occasion risk. CONCLUSIONS: Indigenous Australian drinking patterns vary within and between communities. Initiatives to reduce high-risk drinking should take account of this variability.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: To reduce health and social inequities, it is important to understand how drinking patterns vary within and between Indigenous peoples. We aimed to assess variability in estimates of Indigenous Australian drinking patterns and to identify demographic and methodological factors associated with this. DESIGN: A three-level meta-analysis of Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ('Indigenous') drinking patterns [International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) no. CRD42018103209]. SETTING: Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Indigenous Australians. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcomes extracted were drinking status, single-occasion risk and life-time risk. Moderation analysis was performed to identify potential sources of heterogeneity. Moderators included gender, age, socio-economic status, local alcohol restrictions, sample population, remoteness, Australian state or territory, publication year, Indigenous involvement in survey design or delivery and cultural adaptations. FINDINGS: A systematic review of the literature revealed 41 eligible studies. For all primary outcomes, considerable heterogeneity was identified within ( I 2 2 = 51.39-68.80%) and between ( I 3 2 = 29.27-47.36%) samples. The pooled proportions (P) of current drinkers [P = 0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.53-0.65], single-occasion (P = 0.34, 95% CI = 0.24-0.44) and life-time (P = 0.21, 95% CI = 0.15-0.29) risk were all moderated by gender, age, remoteness and measurement tool. Reference period moderated proportions of participants at single-occasion risk. CONCLUSIONS: Indigenous Australian drinking patterns vary within and between communities. Initiatives to reduce high-risk drinking should take account of this variability.
Authors: K S Kylie Lee; Michelle S Fitts; James H Conigrave; Catherine Zheng; Jimmy Perry; Scott Wilson; Dudley Ah Chee; Shane Bond; Keith Weetra; Tanya N Chikritzhs; Tim Slade; Katherine M Conigrave Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2020-07-06 Impact factor: 4.615
Authors: James H Conigrave; Emma L Bradshaw; Katherine M Conigrave; Richard M Ryan; Scott Wilson; Jimmy Perry; Michael F Doyle; K S Kylie Lee Journal: Addict Sci Clin Pract Date: 2021-04-13
Authors: James H Conigrave; K S Kylie Lee; Paul S Haber; Julia Vnuk; Michael F Doyle; Katherine M Conigrave Journal: Addict Sci Clin Pract Date: 2022-04-05
Authors: James H Conigrave; Scott Wilson; Katherine M Conigrave; Tanya Chikritzhs; Noel Hayman; Angela Dawson; Robert Ali; Jimmy Perry; Michelle S Fitts; Louisa Degenhardt; Michael Doyle; Sonya Egert; Tim Slade; Nadine Ezard; Monika Dzidowska; K S Kylie Lee Journal: Addict Sci Clin Pract Date: 2022-03-14
Authors: Monika Dzidowska; K S Kylie Lee; James H Conigrave; Timothy A Dobbins; Beth Hummerston; Scott Wilson; Paul S Haber; Dennis Gray; Katherine M Conigrave Journal: Addiction Date: 2021-10-20 Impact factor: 7.256