Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29419311›Full record

Trial reportPsychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors2018

Revisiting the Drinker Inventory of Consequences: An extensive evaluation of psychometric properties in two alcohol clinical trials.

Megan Kirouac, Katie Witkiewitz

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Hazardous drinking and alcohol use disorders.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2022
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Megan KirouacCenter on Alcoholism, Substance Abuse, and Addictions, University of New Mexico.
Katie WitkiewitzCenter on Alcoholism, Substance Abuse, and Addictions, University of New Mexico.

Funding

Precision Medicine and Recovery in a Telehealth Treatment Program for Alcohol Use DisorderR01AA022328 · NIAAA · UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO · PI Katie A Witkiewitz · 2013 to 2026
$3.1M
Drinking Trajectories and Mechanisms of Behavior change During and One Year FolloR21AA017137 · NIAAA · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI WITKIEWITZ, KATIE A · 2007 to 2008
$343k
Toward Identifying Clinically Useful Definitions of Treatment SuccessF31AA024959 · NIAAA · UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO · PI KIROUAC, MEGAN · 2016 to 2017
$50k
NIAAA NIH HHS F31 AA024959NIAAA NIH HHS R01 AA022328NIAAA NIH HHS R21 AA017137
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Alcohol-related consequences are linked directly to the diagnostic criteria for alcohol use disorder (AUD). However, alcohol consumption outcome variables (e.g., percent days abstinent, heavy drinking days) remain the dominant outcome in AUD treatment research. Two reasons AUD treatment researchers have not shifted to include alcohol-related consequences as a primary outcome may be that previous studies have failed to provide convincing evidence of (1) the psychometric properties of measures of alcohol-related consequences, and (2) whether consequences measures are sensitive to change following treatment. The present study directly addresses these two concerns via psychometric evaluation and sensitivity/specificity testing of the Drinker Inventory of Consequences (DrInC; Miller, Tonigan, & Longabaugh, 1995) in two of the largest multisite clinical trials ever conducted (COMBINE Study, Anton, et al., 2006; and Project MATCH, Project MATCH Research Group, 1997). Results indicated that the five subscales commonly used for the DrInC had poor construct validity and were noninvariant across time. A newly developed three-factor model consisting of mild, moderate, and severe consequences had excellent psychometrics, including good internal consistency reliability, construct validity, and measurement invariance over time. The three-factor model of the DrInC was also sensitive and specific for detecting consumption outcomes in both COMBINE and MATCH and had convergent validity with measures of consumption and wellbeing. In conclusion, the three-factor DrInC may be a useful tool for defining AUD treatment success in a clinically meaningful way that aligns with diagnostic criteria. (PsycINFO Database Record

Indexed as

AdultAlcohol DrinkingAlcoholismFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID29419311
PMCPMC5808585

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.