Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 420

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Validity of Brief Alcohol Screening Tests Among Adolescents: A Comparison of the AUDIT, POSIT, CAGE, and CRAFFT

Knight, John R., Sherritt, Lon, Harris, Sion Kim, Gates, Elizabeth C., Chang, Grace·2003·Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research

Abstract

Background: Adolescents should be screened for alcohol misuse as part of routine care. The objective of this study was to compare the criterion validity of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT), the Problem Oriented Screening Instrument for Teenagers substance use/abuse scale (POSIT), and the CAGE and CRAFFT questions among adolescents. Methods: Fourteen‐ to 18‐year‐old patients arriving for routine healthcare at a large, hospital‐based adolescent clinic completed the four screens and the criterion standard Adolescent Diagnostic Interview, which yields DSM‐IV diagnoses of alcohol abuse and dependence. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted to determine optimal cut‐points. Areas under the ROC curves of the four screens were compared, and sensitivities and specificities were calculated. Results: Participants’ past 12‐month alcohol diagnostic classifications were as follows: no use (58.6%), nonproblem use (13.0%), problem use (20.8%), abuse (5.4%), and dependence (2.2%). Optimal cut‐points associated with problem use or higher were 2 for AUDIT, 1 for POSIT, 1 for CAGE, and 1 for CRAFFT. ROC curve area of the CAGE was significantly lower compared with areas of all other screens. Sensitivities (95% confidence intervals) were AUDIT 0.88 (0.83–0.93), POSIT 0.84 (0.79–0.90), CAGE 0.37 (0.29–0.44), and CRAFFT 0.92 (0.88‐0.96); specificities were AUDIT 0.81 (0.77–0.85), POSIT 0.89 (0.86–0.92), CAGE 0.96 (0.94–0.98), and CRAFFT 0.64 (0.59–0.69). Conclusions: The AUDIT, POSIT, and CRAFFT have acceptable sensitivity for identifying alcohol problems or disorders in this age group. The CAGE is not recommended for use among adolescents.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1530-0277.2003.tb02723.x

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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

Show all 40 references

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. 10.1111/j.1530-0277.1997.tb03811.x · doi:10.1111/j.1530-0277.1997.tb03811.x · Paper page
  2. Babor T, 1992, AUDIT: The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test: Guidelines for Use in Primary Health Care
  3. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(20000215)19:3<313::AID-SIM370>3.0.CO;2-K · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(20000215)19:3<313::aid-sim370>3.0.co;2-k
  4. Winters K, 1993, Adolescent Diagnostic Interview (ADI) Manual
  5. Wolraich ML, 1996, The Classification of Child and Adolescent Mental Diagnoses in Primary Care (DSM‐PC)

Cited by

See all 420

Metadata

Authors
Knight, J. R., Sherritt, L., Harris, S. K., Gates, E. C., & Chang, G.
Venue
Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2003-01
Volume
27
Issue
1
Pages
67-73
ISSN
  • 0145-6008 (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-0277
OpenAlex
W4253462386
Cited by
420
References
40
FWCI
5.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Validity of Brief Alcohol Screening Tests Among Adolescents: A Comparison of the AUDIT, POSIT, CAGE, and CRAFFT. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1530-0277.2003.tb02723.x
The paper
Knight, J. R., Sherritt, L., Harris, S. K., Gates, E. C., & Chang, G. (2003). Validity of Brief Alcohol Screening Tests Among Adolescents: A Comparison of the AUDIT, POSIT, CAGE, and CRAFFT. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-0277.2003.tb02723.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.