↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Stability of the alcohol use disorders identification test in practical service settings

Overview of attention for article published in Substance abuse and rehabilitation, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
Title
Stability of the alcohol use disorders identification test in practical service settings
Published in
Substance abuse and rehabilitation, March 2017
DOI 10.2147/sar.s126664
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ethan Sahker, Donna A Lancianese, Stephan Arndt

Abstract

The purpose of the present study is to explore the stability of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) in a clinical setting by comparing prescreening heavy drinking questions and AUDIT scores over time. Because instrument stability is equal to test-retest reliability at worst, investigating the stability of the AUDIT would help better understand patient behavior change in context and the appropriateness of the AUDIT in a clinical setting. This was a retrospective exploratory analysis of Visit 1 to Visit 2 AUDIT stability (n=1,099; male [75.4%], female [24.6%]) from all patients with first-time and second-time records in the Iowa Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment project, October 2012 to July 7, 2015 (N=17,699; male [40.6%], female [59.4%]). The AUDIT demonstrated moderate stability (intraclass correlation=0.56, 95% confidence interval: 0.52-0.60). In a multiple regression predicting the (absolute) difference between the two AUDIT scores, the participants' age was highly significant, t(1,092)=6.23, p<0.001. Younger participants clearly showed less stability than their older counterparts. Results are limited/biased by the observational nature of the study design and the use of clinical service data. The present findings contribute to the literature by demonstrating that the AUDIT changes are moderately dependable from Visit 1 to Visit 2 while taking into account patient drinking behavior variability. It is important to know the stability of the AUDIT for continued use in Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment programming.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 27%
Other 3 14%
Student > Bachelor 3 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 14%
Professor 2 9%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 2 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 8 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 14%
Social Sciences 2 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 3 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 March 2017.
All research outputs
#20,110,957
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Substance abuse and rehabilitation
#111
of 125 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#238,657
of 324,971 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Substance abuse and rehabilitation
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 125 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 32.9. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 324,971 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.