The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Concurrent validity of an Estimator of Weekly Alcohol Consumption (EWAC) based on the Extended AUDIT
Open accessPreprint — published as 10.1111/add.15662 · Paper page
Abstract
Background and Aims: The 3-question Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT-C) is frequently used in healthcare for screening and brief advice about levels of alcohol consumption. AUDIT-C scores (0–12) provide feedback as categories of risk rather than estimates of actual alcohol intake, an important metric for behaviour change. The study aimed to (a) develop a continuous metric from the Extended AUDIT-C expressed in United Kingdom (UK) units (8g pure ethanol), offering equivalent accuracy, and providing a direct estimator of weekly alcohol consumption (EWAC) and (b) evaluate the EWAC’s bias and error using the Graduated-Frequency (GF) questionnaire as a reference standard of alcohol consumption. Design: Cross-sectional diagnostic study based on a nationally-representative survey. Settings: Community-dwelling households in England. Participants: 22,404 household residents aged ≥ 16 years reporting drinking alcohol at least occasionally. Measurements: Computer-assisted personal interviews consisting of (a) AUDIT questionnaire with extended response items (the ‘Extended AUDIT’) and (b) GF. Primary outcomes were: mean deviation <1 UK unit (metric of bias); root mean squared deviation <2 UK units (metric of total error) between EWAC and GF. The secondary outcome was the receiver operating characteristic area under the curve for predicting alcohol consumption in excess of 14 and 35 UK units. Findings: EWAC had a positive bias of 0.2 UK units [95% confidence interval: 0.08, 0.4] compared with GF. Deviations were skewed: while the mean error was ±11 UK units/week [9.5, 11.9], in half of participants the deviation between EWAC and GF was between 0 and ±2.1 UK units/week. EWAC predicted consumption in excess of 14 UK units/week with a significantly greater area under the curve (0.918 [0.914, 0.923]) than AUDIT-C (0.870 [0.864, 0.876]) or the full AUDIT (0.854 [0.847, 0.860]). Conclusions: A new estimator of weekly alcohol consumption (EWAC), which uses answers to the Extended Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (Extended AUDIT-C), meets the targeted bias tolerance. It is superior in accuracy to AUDIT-C and the full AUDIT when predicting consumption thresholds, making it a reliable complement to the Extended AUDIT-C for health promotion interventions.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Kaner, E., Bland, M., Cassidy, P., Coulton, S., Dale, V., Deluca, P., Gilvarry, E., Godfrey, C., Heather, N., Myles, J., et al. (2013) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.e8501 · Cited by 277
Research works printed but not linked: 47
- 10.1016/S2468-2667(19)30231-2 · DOI
- 10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/acer.14128 · DOI · Paper page
- Babor TF , Higgins-Biddle JC , Saunders JB , Monteiro MG . The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test. Guidelines for Use in Primary Care. Second Edition. Geneva: World Health Organisation, Department of Mental Health; Substance Dependence; 2001.
- 10.1001/archinte.158.16.1789 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/14651858.CD004148.pub4 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/14651858.CD011479.pub2 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.3922/j.psns.2009.1.12 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2019.04.031 · DOI
- 10.1136/bmj.325.7369.870 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1093/pubmed/fdq095 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1191/1463423606pc292oa · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00490.x · DOI
- 10.1093/pubmed/fdy067 · DOI
- 10.1186/s12875-020-01142-9 · DOI
- 10.1177/0269881113512038 · DOI
- 10.1093/alcalc/agt127 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/s41598-018-22420-8 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1186/s12889-015-1542-7 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2012.03845.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/S0899-3289(00)00039-0 · DOI
- 10.5255/UKDA-SN-7260-1 · DOI
- 10.17605/OSF.IO/7WE4M · DOI
- 10.1186/1471-2458-14-1297 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2004.00815.x · DOI
- 10.1111/add.12609 · DOI
- 10.1111/add.13373 · DOI
- 10.15288/jsa.1992.53.476 · DOI
- Wickham H. Tidyverse: Easily install and load the ’tidyverse’ 2017. · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1465-3362.2010.00224.x · DOI
- 10.2307/2531595 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.3399/bjgp16X683149 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1093/alcalc/agv127 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1093/pubmed/fdx126 · DOI
- 10.1093/alcalc/agt171 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1186/s12889-018-5275-2 · DOI
- Haroon S , Wooldridge D , Hoogewerf J , Mittal A , Bhala N , O’Donnell A , et al. Information standards for recording alcohol use in electronic health records: Project report 2018. · DOI
- 10.1111/acer.12092 · DOI
- 10.1007/s11606-008-0594-0 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1530-0277.1998.tb03991.x · DOI
- 10.1016/j.addbeh.2004.04.022 · DOI
- 10.15288/jsad.2015.76.158 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1530-0277.1998.tb04368.x · DOI
- 10.1177/009145090903600320 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1360-0443.1989.tb00792.x · DOI
- 10.1037/14090-000 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/s11065-008-9080-z · DOI
Metadata
- Authors
- Dutey-Magni, P., Brown, J., Holmes, J., & Sinclair, J.
- Affiliations
- University College London (GB)
- University of Sheffield (GB)
- Venue
- Addiction
- Publisher
- openRxiv
- Published
- 2020-12-11
- Volume
- 117
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 580-589
- ISSN
- 0965-2140 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3192701357
- Cited by
- 10
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2
- FWCI
- 1.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Addiction (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- medRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
- ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (acceptedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Wessex Academic Health Science Network
- Cancer Research UK (22962)
- National Institute for Health and Care Research (15/63/01, SPHR‐SWP‐ALC‐WP5)
- Medical Research Council Canada (MR/P016960/1)
- Medical Research Council (MR/P016960/1, P016960)
- Public Health Research Programme (15/63/01)
- School for Public Health Research (SPHR-SWP-ALC-WP5)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Alcohol Consumption and Health Effects
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Research and Theory › Health Education and Validation
- Keywords
- weekly alcohol consumption, alcohol consumption assessment, AUDIT-C, concurrent validity, alcohol screening, alcohol consumption thresholds, measurement bias, alcoholism, brief advice, alcohol harm prevention, community-dwelling adults, England, alcohol consumption monitoring
- MeSH terms
- Alcohol Drinking, Alcoholism, Cross-Sectional Studies, Humans, Mass Screening, Surveys and Questionnaires
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
