Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29590416›Full record

ArticleJournal of public health (Oxford, England)2019

Opportunistic screening for alcohol use problems in adolescents attending emergency departments: an evaluation of screening tools.

Simon Coulton, M Fasihul Alam, Sadie Boniface, Paolo Deluca, Kim Donoghue, Eilish Gilvarry, Eileen Kaner, Ellen Lynch, Ian Maconochie, Paul McArdle and 9 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of public health (Oxford, England), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Sexual identity, child maltreatment, mental health, and substance use among emerging adults aged 18 to 23 years.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Screening Adolescents for Substance Use: a Four-Step Approach for Trainees.Academic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. 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

19 authors at 9 institutions in 2 countries.

Simon CoultonCentre for Health Services Studies, School of Social Science and Social Policy Research, George Allen Wing, University of Kent, Canterbury, Kent, UK.
M Fasihul AlamCollege of Health Sciences, Qatar University, Doha, Qatar.
Sadie BonifaceAddictions Department, National Addiction Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Paolo DelucaAddictions Department, National Addiction Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Kim DonoghueAddictions Department, National Addiction Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Eilish GilvarryNorthumberland Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, UK.
Eileen KanerInstitute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle, UK.
Ellen LynchInstitute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle, UK.
Ian MaconochiePaediatric Emergency Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Paul McArdleNorthumberland Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, UK.
Ruth McGovernInstitute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle, UK.
Dorothy Newbury-BirchSchool of Health and Social Care, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, UK.
Robert PattonSchool of Psychology, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK.
Ceri J PhillipsSwansea Centre for Health Economics, College of Human and Health Sciences, Swansea University, Swansea, UK.
Thomas PhillipsAddictions Department, National Addiction Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Hannah RoseAddictions Department, National Addiction Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Ian RussellSwansea University Medical School, Swansea, UK.
John StrangAddictions Department, National Addiction Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Colin DrummondAddictions Department, National Addiction Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
King's College London · GBNewcastle University · GBCumbria Northumberland Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust · GBSwansea University · GBImperial College London · GBQatar University · QATeesside University · GBUniversity of Kent · GBUniversity of Surrey · GB

Funding

Department of Health CDRF 2009-81Department of Health HTA/13/86/03Department of Health RP-PG-0609-10162Medical Research Council G0701681Medical Research Council G0701818Medical Research Council MR/K02325X/1Medical Research Council MR/N00616X/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo estimate and compare the optimal cut-off score of Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and AUDIT-C in identifying at-risk alcohol consumption, heavy episodic alcohol use, ICD-10 alcohol abuse and alcohol dependence in adolescents attending ED in England.

designOpportunistic cross-sectional survey.

setting10 emergency departments across England.

participantsAdolescents (n = 5377) aged between their 10th and 18th birthday who attended emergency departments between December 2012 and May 2013. MEASURES: Scores on the AUDIT and AUDIT-C. At-risk alcohol consumption and monthly episodic alcohol consumption in the past 3 months were derived using the time-line follow back method. Alcohol abuse and alcohol dependence was assessed in accordance with ICD-10 criteria using the MINI-KID.

findingsAUDIT-C with a score of 3 was more effective for at-risk alcohol use (AUC 0.81; sensitivity 87%, specificity 97%), heavy episodic use (0.84; 76%, 98%) and alcohol abuse (0.98; 91%, 90%). AUDIT with a score of 7 was more effective in identifying alcohol dependence (0.92; 96%, 94%).

conclusionsThe 3-item AUDIT-C is more effective than AUDIT in screening adolescents for at-risk alcohol use, heavy episodic alcohol use and alcohol abuse. AUDIT is more effective than AUDIT-C for the identification of alcohol dependence.

Indexed as

AdolescentAlcoholismChildCross-Sectional StudiesEmergency Service, HospitalEnglandFemaleHumansMalePsychiatric Status Rating ScalesSensitivity and Specificityadolescentalcoholdiagnosisscreening

Identifiers

PMID29590416
PMCPMC6459356
OpenAlexW2785935623

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.