ArticleDrug and alcohol dependence2019
Approaches for creating comparable measures of alcohol use symptoms: Harmonization with eight studies of criminal justice populations.
Article in Drug and alcohol dependence, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Brief Alcohol Interventions are Effective through 6 Months: Findings from Marginalized Zero-inflated Poisson and Negative Binomial Models in a Two-step IPD Meta-analysis.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2023Pooled it
- Article
- Practical Implications of Sum Scores Being Psychometrics' Greatest Accomplishment.Psychometrika · 2024Article
- Scoping review of assessment tools for, magnitudes of and factors associated with problem drinking in population-based studies.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Association of over the counter "hangover remedy" use with alcohol use problems and consumption patterns among young adults.Alcohol and alcoholism (Oxford, Oxfordshire) · 2024Article
- Women and Men are the Barometers of Relationships: Testing the Predictive Power of Women's and Men's Relationship Satisfaction.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
- Linking Scores with Patient-Reported Health Outcome Instruments:A VALIDATION STUDY AND COMPARISON OF THREE LINKING METHODS.Psychometrika · 2021Article
- Psychometric Data Linking Across HIV and Substance Use Cohorts.AIDS and behavior · 2020Article
- Multivariate Higher-Order IRT Model and MCMC Algorithm for Linking Individual Participant Data From Multiple Studies.Frontiers in psychology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWith increasing data archives comprised of studies with similar measurement, optimal methods for data harmonization and measurement scoring are a pressing need. We compare three methods for harmonizing and scoring the AUDIT as administered with minimal variation across 11 samples from eight study sites within the STTR (Seek-Test-Treat-Retain) Research Harmonization Initiative. Descriptive statistics and predictive validity results for cut-scores, sum scores, and Moderated Nonlinear Factor Analysis scores (MNLFA; a psychometric harmonization method) are presented.
methodsAcross the eight study sites, sample sizes ranged from 50 to 2405 and target populations varied based on sampling frame, location, and inclusion/exclusion criteria. The pooled sample included 4667 participants (82% male, 52% Black, 24% White, 13% Hispanic, and 8% Asian/ Pacific Islander; mean age of 38.9 years). Participants completed the AUDIT at baseline in all studies.
resultsAfter logical harmonization of items, we scored the AUDIT using three methods: published cut-scores, sum scores, and MNLFA. We found greater variation, fewer floor effects, and the ability to directly address missing data in MNLFA scores as compared to cut-scores and sum scores. MNLFA scores showed stronger associations with binge drinking and clearer study differences than did other scores.
conclusionsMNLFA scores are a promising tool for data harmonization and scoring in pooled data analysis. Model complexity with large multi-study applications, however, may require new statistical advances to fully realize the benefits of this approach.
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.