Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 345

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Screening for Alcohol Abuse Using CAGE Scores and Likelihood Ratios

Buchsbaum, David G., Buchanan, Robin G., Centor, Robert M., Schnoll, Sidney H., Lawton, Marcia J.·1991·Annals of Internal Medicine

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the performance of the CAGE (acronym referring to four questions, see below) questionnaire in discriminating between medicine outpatients with and without an alcohol abuse or dependence disorder. DESIGN: A cross-sectional design of a sample of consecutive patients who received both the alcohol module of the diagnostic interview schedule and the CAGE (Cut down, Annoyed, Guilty, Eye-opener) screening questionnaire. SETTING: The outpatient medical practice of an urban university teaching hospital. PATIENTS: All patients 18 years or older who signed a consent form approved by the university's institutional review board. MEASUREMENT: Calculation of the sensitivity, specificity, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, and likelihood ratio for CAGE scores of 0 to 4. RESULTS: Thirty-six percent of the sample group met criteria for a history of alcohol abuse or dependence. A CAGE score of 2 or more was associated with a sensitivity and specificity of 74% and 91%. The calculated area under the ROC curve was 0.89, whereas the likelihood ratios for CAGE scores of 0 to 4 were 0.14, 1.5, 4.5, 13, and 100, respectively. These ratios were associated with posterior probabilities for an abuse or dependence disorder of 7%, 46%, 72%, 88%, and 98%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Clinicians can improve their ability to estimate a patient's risk for an alcohol abuse or dependence disorder using likelihood ratios for CAGE scores.

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 · 10.7326/0003-4819-115-10-774

Cites

3 of 3 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

Cited by

See all 345

Metadata

Authors
Buchsbaum, D. G., Buchanan, R. G., Centor, R. M., Schnoll, S. H., & Lawton, M. J.
Venue
Annals of Internal Medicine
Published
1991-11-15
Volume
115
Issue
10
Pages
774-777
ISSN
  • 0003-4819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-3704
OpenAlex
W2092106039
Cited by
345
References
3
FWCI
8.00
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: Screening for Alcohol Abuse Using CAGE Scores and Likelihood Ratios. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.7326/0003-4819-115-10-774
The paper
Buchsbaum, D. G., Buchanan, R. G., Centor, R. M., Schnoll, S. H., & Lawton, M. J. (1991). Screening for Alcohol Abuse Using CAGE Scores and Likelihood Ratios. Annals of Internal Medicine. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-115-10-774

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.