Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31936502›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2020

Sensitivity to Experiencing Alcohol Hangovers: Reconsideration of the 0.11% Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC) Threshold for Having a Hangover.

Joris C Verster, L Darren Kruisselbrink, Karin A Slot, Aikaterini Anogeianaki, Sally Adams, Chris Alford, Lizanne Arnoldy, Elisabeth Ayre, Stephanie Balikji, Sarah Benson and 22 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Alcohol Consumption on the Heaviest Drinking Occasion and Hangovers during the First Dutch COVID-19 Lockdown.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Alcohol Hangover Across the Lifespan: Impact Of Sex and Age.Alcohol and alcoholism (Oxford, Oxfordshire) · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Perceived Immune Fitness, Individual Strength and Hangover Severity.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

32 authors at 14 institutions in 6 countries.

Joris C VersterDivision of Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht University, 3584CG Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6455-2096
L Darren KruisselbrinkCentre of Lifestyle Studies, School of Kinesiology, Acadia University, Wolfville, NS B4P 2R6, Canada.
Karin A SlotDivision of Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht University, 3584CG Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Aikaterini AnogeianakiDivision of Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht University, 3584CG Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Sally AdamsAddiction and Mental Health Group, Department of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath BA2 7AY, UK.
Chris AlfordPsychological Sciences Research Group, University of the West of England, Bristol BS16 1QY, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0887-6958
Lizanne ArnoldyDivision of Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht University, 3584CG Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Elisabeth AyreCentre for Human Psychopharmacology, Swinburne University, Melbourne, VIC 3122, Australia.
Stephanie BalikjiDivision of Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht University, 3584CG Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Sarah BensonCentre for Human Psychopharmacology, Swinburne University, Melbourne, VIC 3122, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8626-0521
Gillian BruceEducation and Social Sciences, University of the West of Scotland, Paisley PA1 2BE, UK.
Lydia E DevenneySchool of Psychology, Life and Health Sciences, Ulster University, Coleraine, Co. Londonderry BT52 1SA, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3178-7067
Michael R FroneDepartment of Psychology, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York, Buffalo, NY 14203, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4002-3947
Craig GunnAddiction and Mental Health Group, Department of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath BA2 7AY, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0367-3281
Thomas HeffernanDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 8ST, UK.
Kai O HenselCambridge Biomedical Campus, Department of Paediatrics, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK.
Anna HogewoningDivision of Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht University, 3584CG Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Sean J JohnsonPsychological Sciences Research Group, University of the West of England, Bristol BS16 1QY, UK.
Albertine E van Lawick van PabstDivision of Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht University, 3584CG Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Aurora J A E van de LooDivision of Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht University, 3584CG Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0016-9151
Marlou MackusDivision of Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht University, 3584CG Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Agnese MerloEducation and Social Sciences, University of the West of Scotland, Paisley PA1 2BE, UK.
René J L MurphyCentre of Lifestyle Studies, School of Kinesiology, Acadia University, Wolfville, NS B4P 2R6, Canada.
Lauren OwenDepartment of Psychology, School of Health and Society, University of Salford, Salford 5 M6 6PU, UK.
Emily O C PalmerDepartment of Medicine, Imperial College London, London W12 0NN, UK.
Charmaine J I van RossumDivision of Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht University, 3584CG Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Andrew ScholeyCentre for Human Psychopharmacology, Swinburne University, Melbourne, VIC 3122, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4484-5462
Chantal TerpstraCentre for Human Psychopharmacology, Swinburne University, Melbourne, VIC 3122, Australia.
Vatsalya VatsalyaDepartment of Medicine, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY 40202, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6764-6891
Sterre A VermeulenDivision of Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht University, 3584CG Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Michelle van WijkDivision of Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht University, 3584CG Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Ann-Kathrin StockCognitive Neurophysiology Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine of the TU Dresden, University of Dresden, D-01307 Dresden, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7113-4020
Utrecht University · NLSwinburne University of Technology · AUAcadia University · CAUniversity of Bath · GBUniversity of the West of England · GBUniversity of the West of Scotland · GBImperial College London · GBNorthumbria University · GBTechnische Universität Dresden · DEUniversity at Buffalo, State University of New York · USUniversity of Louisville · USUniversity of Salford · GBUniversity of Ulster · GBWitten/Herdecke University · DE

Funding

Work Stress and Alcohol Use: A National Study of Unresolved and Unexplored IssuesR01AA016592 · NIAAA · STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BUFFALO · PI FRONE, MICHAEL R · 2007 to 2010
$2.2M
NIAAA NIH HHS R01 AA016592
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The 2010 Alcohol Hangover Research Group consensus paper defined a cutoff blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of 0.11% as a toxicological threshold indicating that sufficient alcohol had been consumed to develop a hangover. The cutoff was based on previous research and applied mostly in studies comprising student samples. Previously, we showed that sensitivity to hangovers depends on (estimated) BAC during acute intoxication, with a greater percentage of drinkers reporting hangovers at higher BAC levels. However, a substantial number of participants also reported hangovers at comparatively lower BAC levels. This calls the suitability of the 0.11% threshold into question. Recent research has shown that subjective intoxication, i.e., the level of severity of reported drunkenness, and not BAC, is the most important determinant of hangover severity. Non-student samples often have a much lower alcohol intake compared to student samples, and overall BACs often remain below 0.11%. Despite these lower BACs, many non-student participants report having a hangover, especially when their subjective intoxication levels are high. This may be the case when alcohol consumption on the drinking occasion that results in a hangover significantly exceeds their "normal" drinking level, irrespective of whether they meet the 0.11% threshold in any of these conditions. Whereas consumers may have relative tolerance to the adverse effects at their "regular" drinking level, considerably higher alcohol intake-irrespective of the absolute amount-may consequentially result in a next-day hangover. Taken together, these findings suggest that the 0.11% threshold value as a criterion for having a hangover should be abandoned.

Indexed as

alcoholblood alcohol concentrationhangoversensitivitysubjective intoxication

Identifiers

PMID31936502
PMCPMC7019760
OpenAlexW2999193895

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.