ArticleThe American journal of drug and alcohol abuse2014
A comparison between brand-specific and traditional alcohol surveillance methods to assess underage drinkers' reported alcohol use.
Article in The American journal of drug and alcohol abuse, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Social and Cultural Contexts of Alcohol Use: Influences in a Social-Ecological Framework.Alcohol research : current reviews · 2016Review
- Brands matter: Major findings from the Alcohol Brand Research Among Underage Drinkers (ABRAND) project.Addiction research & theoryArticle
- A Needs Assessment of the Number of Comprehensive Addiction Care Physicians Required in a Canadian Setting.Journal of addiction medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAdolescent alcohol consumption remains common and is associated with many negative health outcomes. Unfortunately, common alcohol surveillance methods often underestimate consumption. Improved alcohol use measures are needed to characterize the landscape of youth drinking.
objectivesWe aimed to compare a standard quantity-frequency measure of youth alcohol consumption to a novel brand-specific measure.
methodsWe recruited a sample of 1031 respondents across the United States to complete an online survey. Analyses included 833 male and female underage drinkers ages 13-20. Respondents reported on how many of the past 30 days they consumed alcohol, and the number of drinks consumed on an average drinking day. Using our brand-specific measure, respondents identified which brands they consumed, how many days they consumed each brand, and how many drinks per brand they usually had.
resultsYouth reported consuming significantly more alcohol (on average, 11 drinks more per month) when responding to the brand-specific versus the standard measure (p < 0.001). The two major predictors of the difference between the two measures were being a heavy episodic drinker (p < 0.001, 95% CI = 4.1-12.0) and the total number of brands consumed (p < 0.001, 95% CI = 2.0-2.8).
conclusionThis study contributes to the field of alcohol and adolescent research first by investigating a potentially more accurate alcohol surveillance method, and secondly by promoting the assessment of alcohol use among adolescents vulnerable to risky alcohol use. Finally, our survey addresses the potential impact of alcohol marketing on youth and their subsequent alcohol brand preferences and consumption.
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.