ArticleUpsala journal of medical sciences2024
Validity of prenatal AUDIT screening for alcohol disorders - a Nationwide Swedish register study.
Article in Upsala journal of medical sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to assess the external validity of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) in Swedish prenatal care as an indicator for alcohol-addiction disorders, and to characterize women with mismatched information in healthcare registers. Design: This study was designed as a National register-based study. Setting: Sweden. Participants: The study sample included 739,735 pregnancies over the period 2014-2020. Methods: Prospectively collected prenatal AUDIT screening in the Primary Outcome Measures: The diagnostic properties of AUDIT were assessed based on sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), positive likelihood ratio (LR+), negative likelihood ratio (LR-), and accuracy (proportion of true positive and true negative) for an AUDIT score of ≥ 6 points for alcohol disorders. Women with mismatched information in the register were characterized and assessed by multinominal logistic regression, using women with matched information in the registers for reference. Results: An alcohol-related disorder was recorded in 3.1%, while 25,770 (3.5%) had an AUDIT point ≥ 6. The diagnostic accuracy of the AUDIT ≥ 6 points for detection of an alcohol related disorder during a year prior to pregnancy was 95.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 95.7, 95.8), with a positive LR of 8.03 (95% CI: 7.5, 8.6). The sensitivity for detecting a pre-pregnancy alcohol related disorder was 33.0% (95% CI: 30.9, 35.1). Being young, nulliparous, of low education, and of Swedish origin increased the likelihood of being misclassified with the AUDIT. Prior psychiatric care was associated with false negatives, especially for women with neuropsychiatric disorders (odds ratio [OR]: 10.39, 95% CI: 9.89, 10.90). Conclusions: The accuracy of AUDIT in screening for alcohol disorders at a population-based level was high, but only identified one third of women with alcohol-related disorders when using a cut-off of six points criterion.
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.