ArticleBMJ open2018
Comparison of self-reported measures of alcohol-related dependence among young Swiss men: a study protocol for a cross-sectional controlled sample.
Article in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating the cost of simplicity in score building: An example from alcohol research.PloS one · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedCorrection:2019
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionShort screenings of alcohol-related dependence are needed for population-based assessments. A clinical interview constitutes a reliable diagnosis often seen as gold standard, but it is costly and time consuming and as such, not suitable for population-based assessments. Therefore, self-reported questionnaires are needed (eg, alcohol use disorder (AUD) as in the Diagnostic and Statistic Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) 5), but their reliability is questionable. Recent studies called for more evidence-based measurements for population-based screening (eg, heavy alcohol use over time (HAU)). This study aims to test the reliability of different self-reported measures of alcohol use. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Based on stratified random selection, 280 participants will be recruited from the French-speaking subgroup of the Swiss National Science Foundation-supported Cohort Study on Substance Use and Risk Factors (C-SURF). This cohort is a population-based sample of young Swiss men in their mid-20s (n=2668). The sample size calculation is based on a proportion non-inferiority test (alpha=5%, power=80%, margin of equivalence=10%, difference in sensitivity between self-reported AUD and HAU=5%, correlation between AUD and HAU=0.35, and drop-outs=15%). Assessment will include a clinical interview as the gold standard of alcohol-related dependence, self-reported alcohol measures (HAU, AUD and drinking patterns), biomarkers as gold standards of chronic excessive drinking, and health outcomes. To assess the validity of the self-reported alcohol measures, sensitivity analyses will be run. The associations between alcohol-related measures and health outcomes will be tested. A non-response analysis will be run using the previous waves of the C-SURF study using logistic regressions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol has been approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of the Canton of Vaud, Switzerland (no. 2017-00776). The results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international conferences.
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.