ArticleDrug and alcohol dependence2016
Validity of the CAGE questionnaire for men who have sex with men (MSM) in China.
Article in Drug and alcohol dependence, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dimensional structure of one-year post-COVID-19 neuropsychiatric and somatic sequelae and association with role impairment.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Article
- Awareness of, Willingness to Take PrEP and Its Actual Use Among Belgian MSM at High Risk of HIV Infection: Secondary Analysis of the Belgian European MSM Internet Survey.AIDS and behavior · 2022Article
- Awareness and Attitudes of Mongolian Adolescents and Youth toward Alcohol Consumption and Alcohol-related Harm.Addiction & health · 2021Article
- Exploring the Burn Model System National Database: Burn injuries, substance misuse, and the CAGE questionnaire.Burns : journal of the International Society for Burn Injuries · 2020Article
- The "Dark Side" Effects of Social Capital on Harmful Drinking among Chinese Community Residents: A Multilevel Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDetection of heavy drinking among men who have sex with men (MSM) is crucial for both intervention and treatment. The CAGE questionnaire is a popular screening instrument for alcohol use problems. However, the validity of CAGE for Chinese MSM is unknown.
methodData were from three waves of cross-sectional assessments among general MSM (n=523) and men who sell sex to other men ("money boys" or MBs, n=486) in Shanghai, China. Specifically, participants were recruited using respondent-driven, community popular opinion leader, and venue-based sampling methods. The validity of the CAGE was examined for different cutoff scores and individual CAGE items using self-reported heavy drinking (≥14 drinks in the past week) as a criterion.
resultsIn the full sample, 75 (7.4%) of participants were classified as heavy drinkers. 32 (6.1%) of general MSM and 43 (8.9%) of MBs were heavy drinkers. The area under curve statistics for overall sample was 0.7 (95% CI: 0.36-0.77). Overall, the sensitivities (ranging from 18.7 to 66.7%), specificities (ranging from 67.5 to 95.8%), and positive predictive values (ranging from 14.1 to 26.4%) for different cutoff scores were inadequate using past week heavy drinking as the criterion. The ability of CAGE to discriminate heavy drinkers from non-heavy drinkers was limited.
conclusionsOur findings showed the inadequate validity of CAGE as a screening instrument for current heavy drinking in Chinese MSM. Further research using a combination of validity criteria is needed to determine the applicability of CAGE for this population.
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.