ArticleJournal of studies on alcohol and drugs2016
Sources of Misspecification Bias in Assessments of Risks Related to Alcohol Use.
Article in Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impacts of impaired control and pharmacological criteria for lifetime alcohol use disorder on relationships between drinking and problems.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2025Article
- Contexts of Drinking- and Alcohol-Related Problems Among Whites and Hispanics on and off the US/Mexico border in California.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2024Article
- Drinking in Mexico by Whites and Hispanics on and off the US/Mexico border in California.Journal of ethnicity in substance abuse · 2023Article
- Microecological Relationships Between Area Income, Off-Premise Alcohol Outlet Density, Drinking Patterns, and Alcohol Use Disorders: The East Bay Neighborhoods Study.Alcoholism, clinical and experimental research · 2020Article
- Space and Place in Alcohol Research.Current epidemiology reports · 2019Article
- Heterogeneous Dose-Response Analyses of Alcohol Abuse and Dependence.Alcoholism, clinical and experimental research · 2019Article
- Associations of Early Age of First Intoxication with Past Year Drinking Contexts and Problems.Substance use & misuse · 2019Article
- Identifying the Population Sources of Alcohol Impaired Driving: An Assessment of Context Specific Drinking Risks.Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs · 2018Article
- Adolescent drinking in different contexts: What behaviors do parents control?Addictive behaviors reports · 2017Article
- Late-Life Drinking Problems: The Predictive Roles of Drinking Level vs. Drinking Pattern.Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveMany different measures of alcohol use are applied in survey-based epidemiological studies of alcohol-related risks. Differences in the selection of drinking measures and alternative specifications of quantitative relationships of these measures to problem outcomes limit researchers' abilities to compare and assess alcohol effects across studies. We used a quantitative definition of drinking patterns to identify relationships among drinking measures and uncover sources of bias in assessments of drinking risks.
methodA census of drinking measures from studies published in four leading journals in the first half of 2013 were mapped onto a "drinking patterns table," quantitatively relating each measure to every other. Relationships among these measures and in relation to two problem outcomes, physiological problems and sexual risks, were examined using data from 41,352 undergraduate college student drinkers in California.
resultsTwenty-nine sets of drinking measures appeared across 74 published studies; no common statistical procedure was used to assess drinking risks. Empirically observed distributions of heavy drinking (R(2) = .887, p < .001) and variances in drinking quantities (R(2) = .645, p < .001) were predicted from the drinking patterns table. Heteroscedasticity in drinking measures also biased estimates of physiological risks related to drinking quantities (z = -5.159, p < .001), volume (z = 4.592, p < .001), and heavy drinking (z = -5.431, p < .001).
conclusionsRelationships between drinking measures can be formally identified and related to one another using drinking patterns tables. Biases related to selections of different drinking measures and unobserved heteroscedasticity can be identified and controlled through formal quantitative assessments of relationships between drinking measures and observed outcomes.
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.