Cited by 56Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesAlcohol Consumption and Health EffectsWorkplace Health and Well-being

The use of AUDIT as a screening tool for alcohol use in the police work-place

Open access
DAVEY, JEREMY D., OBST, PATRICIA L., SHEEHAN, MARY C.·2000·Drug and Alcohol Review

Abstract

Abstract There has been little research examining the use of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) as a work‐place screening tool. In the current study a large scale sample (n = 4193) of police personnel completed the 10 AUDIT questions and two readiness‐to‐change questions. The sample represented 67% of all members of an Australian State Police organization. Analysis of AUDIT scores showed that 65% of the sample scored in the low risk of hazardous alcohol consumption range, 32% (33% of males and 24% of females) scored in the at risk for harmful alcohol consumption range and 3% scored in the range indicating risk of alcohol dependence. Age emerged as a clear risk factor of hazardous drinking patterns. The 18–25‐year age group recorded higher average alcohol consumption, higher rates of risk of abnormal drinking behaviour, higher rates of adverse consequences from drinking alcohol and higher total AUDIT scores than other age groups. This was consistent for both males and females. Of those scoring in the at‐risk range, 72.5% reported that they did not have a drinking problem. Sixty percent also reported that it would be easy to stop drinking. This study exemplifies how the AUDIT can be used to provide strong evidence for the need for work‐based intervention programmes. Further, it can be used to target particular groups within the organization at risk of harmful alcohol use.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09595230096147

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
DAVEY, J. D., OBST, P. L., & SHEEHAN, M. C.
Affiliations
Queensland University of Technology (AU)
Corresponding author
DAVEY, JEREMY D.
Venue
Drug and Alcohol Review
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2000-03
Volume
19
Issue
1
Pages
49-54
ISSN
  • 0959-5236 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-3362
OpenAlex
W2130854608
Cited by
56
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2012: 5
FWCI
2.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Drug and Alcohol Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Alcohol Consumption and Health Effects
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Workplace Health and Well-being
Keywords
Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test, auditing, workplace alcohol screening, police officers, hazardous drinking, alcoholism, readiness to change, age as risk factor, gender differences in drinking, alcohol use disorder screening

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review