ArticleAlcoholism, clinical and experimental research2012
Commentary on Fitzpatrick and colleagues (2012): Forecasting the effect of the amethyst initiative on college drinking.
Article in Alcoholism, clinical and experimental research, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is considerable evidence that heavy episodic drinking (HED) is a serious problem among college students. Concern with this problem has led 135 college presidents to endorse the Amethyst Initiative, which promotes the lowering of the minimum legal drinking age (MLDA) from 21 to 18. The Amethyst Initiative claims that the current MLDA of 21 encourages underage college students to drink in unsupervised locations where they adopt misconceptions regarding the normative level of student drinking that leads to excessive consumption or HED. The study by Fitzpatrick and colleagues (2012) in this issue challenges this hypothesis by contrasting the potential reduction in misapprehension of the drinking norm against the increase in consumption that would be expected if the MLDA was lowered to 18.
methodsThis commentary places the Fitzpatrick study within the larger context of the MLDA, noting that full consideration of the lowering the MLDA requires the inclusion of 18- to 20-year-old noncollege youths in the work force and 15- to 17-year-old high school students who will have increased access to alcohol through their 18-year-old peers.
resultsResearch suggests that alcohol consumption and its associated problems will increase for 15- to 20-year-olds if the MLDA was lowered. This commentary also identifies alternative strategies for reducing college student HED that do not require lowering the MLDA.
conclusionsAlthough college binge drinking is a significant problem, reducing the drinking age is unlikely to be effective. Instead, it will increase the risk of alcohol problems faced by even younger high school students.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.