Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11255902›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2001

Screening properties of questionnaires and laboratory tests for the detection of alcohol abuse or dependence in a general practice population.

B Aertgeerts, F Buntinx, S Ansoms, J Fevery

Open access · greenAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

54 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 197 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Prevalence and Comorbidities of Adult Attention-deficit/hyperactivity Disorder in a Community Sample from Korea.Clinical psychopharmacology and neuroscience : the official scientific journal of the Korean College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2023
    Article
  7. Using Facebook language to predict and describe excessive alcohol use.Alcoholism, clinical and experimental research · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Benzodiazepine and unhealthy alcohol use among adult outpatients.The American journal of managed care · 2019
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Comparative Test Evaluation: Methods and Challenges.Journal of gambling studies · 2018
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

B AertgeertsDepartment of General Practice, Clinical Epidemiology Unit, University Hospital Gasthuisberg, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium. bert.aertgeerts@med.kuleuven.ac.be
F Buntinx
S Ansoms
J Fevery
KU Leuven · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEarly identification of alcohol abuse or dependence is important in general practice because many diseases are influenced by alcohol. General practitioners, however, fail to recognise most patients with alcohol problems.

aimTo assess the diagnostic performance of the CAGE and AUDIT questionnaires, their derivatives, and laboratory tests in screening for alcohol abuse or dependence in a primary care population (male and female patients), attending their general practitioner (GP). DESIGN OF STUDY: A diagnostic cross-sectional study.

settingA random sample of patients who were over 18 years of age (n = 1992) attending 69 general practices situated in the same region in Belgium.

methodAlcohol questionnaires (CIDI 1.1, section I, CAGE, AUDIT, AUDIT-C, Five-Shot, and AUDIT Piccinelli) were completed, demographic information was recorded, and patients underwent conventional blood tests, including mean corpuscular volume, liver function tests, the gamma-glutamyl transferase test, and carbohydrate-deficient transferrin (CDT, estimated using %CDT). Calculations of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, odds ratios with their 95% CIs, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for different scores of the questionnaires and laboratory tests, using DSM-III-R as the reference standard.

resultsThe past-year prevalence of alcohol abuse or dependence in this population was 8.9% (178/1992) of which there were 132 male and 45 female patients attending a general practice. The GPs identified 33.5% of patients with alcohol abuse or dependence. Among male patients, all questionnaires had reasonable sensitivities between 68% and 93% and hence at lower cut-points than recommended. Only the sensitivity of the CAGE, even at its lowest cut-point of > or = 1 was lower (62%). In female patients the sensitivities were lower; however, odds ratios were higher for different questionnaires. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves did not differ between the questionnaires. The laboratory tests had low diagnostic accuracy with areas under the ROC curves (AUCs) between 0.60 and 0.67 for female patients and 0.57 and 0.65 for male patients.

conclusionsThis is one of the largest known studies on alcohol abuse or dependence among family care practices. We confirm earlier results that the AUDIT questionnaire seems equally appropriate for males and females; however, screening properties among male patients are higher. Nevertheless, the Five-Shot questionnaire is shorter and easier to use in a general practice setting and has nearly the same diagnostic properties in male and female general practice patient populations. We confirm that conventional laboratory tests are of no use for detecting alcohol abuse or dependence in a primary care setting. Also, the %CDT cannot been used as a screening instrument in this general practice population.

Indexed as

AlcoholismCross-Sectional StudiesFamily PracticeFemaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsROC CurveSensitivity and SpecificitySurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID11255902
PMCPMC1313952
OpenAlexW1835610030

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.