PURPOSE: This study identified predictors of older adolescents at risk for problem drinking. METHODS: College freshmen (n = 492) completed a questionnaire that addressed drinking patterns, risk factors for problem drinking, the CAGE questions, the Perceived-Benefit-of-Drinking Scale (PBDS), and the Children of Alcoholics Screening Test (CAST). They also responded to questions regarding alcohol-related problems including blackouts; alcohol-related injury, illness, violence, or legal problems; driving under the influence; and missing class. 50% of students were male with a mean age of 17.9 years (SD = 0.5). RESULTS: Higher scores on the CAGE and PBDS, use of tobacco, best friend's drinking pattern, and younger age at first drinking were associated with higher scores on a quantity/frequency drinking index and with reports of significantly more alcohol-related problems. Regression models using these variables explained 40% to 51% of the variance in drinking habits and alcohol-related problems. CONCLUSION: A composite screening measure had significantly better sensitivity and specificity than either the CAGE or PBDS alone in identifying older adolescents at high risk for problem drinking.
PURPOSE: This study identified predictors of older adolescents at risk for problem drinking. METHODS: College freshmen (n = 492) completed a questionnaire that addressed drinking patterns, risk factors for problem drinking, the CAGE questions, the Perceived-Benefit-of-Drinking Scale (PBDS), and the Children of Alcoholics Screening Test (CAST). They also responded to questions regarding alcohol-related problems including blackouts; alcohol-related injury, illness, violence, or legal problems; driving under the influence; and missing class. 50% of students were male with a mean age of 17.9 years (SD = 0.5). RESULTS: Higher scores on the CAGE and PBDS, use of tobacco, best friend's drinking pattern, and younger age at first drinking were associated with higher scores on a quantity/frequency drinking index and with reports of significantly more alcohol-related problems. Regression models using these variables explained 40% to 51% of the variance in drinking habits and alcohol-related problems. CONCLUSION: A composite screening measure had significantly better sensitivity and specificity than either the CAGE or PBDS alone in identifying older adolescents at high risk for problem drinking.