ArticleAddiction (Abingdon, England)2025
Quantification of racial and ethnic disparities in alcohol-related problems in light of different methodological approaches.
Article in Addiction (Abingdon, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Exploring Social and Structural Determinants of Substance Use Among Sexual and Gender Minority Adults in the United States.Journal of the International Association of Providers of AIDS CareArticle
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
Abstract
aimWe applied the Institute of Medicine (IOM) definition of racial and ethnic disparities in healthcare to estimate disparities in alcohol-related problems. This estimation involved adjusting for drinking patterns, gender and age, with observed disparities further explained by socioeconomic status (SES). We compared results of five statistical approaches which use different methods for adjusting covariates. DESIGN AND
settingWe conducted analysis of the repeated cross-sectional data from the US National Alcohol Surveys (NAS) from 2000 to 2020, comparing traditional regression, rank-and-replacement, propensity score weighting, G-computation and the double-robust methods.
participants39 239 respondents aged 18 + across five NAS surveys oversampling Black and Hispanic/Latino/a populations. MEASUREMENTS: Our primary analysis examined the dichotomous outcomes of the three alcohol problem measures: occurrence of negative consequences, alcohol dependence (using DSM-IV criteria) and alcohol use disorder (AUD, using DSM-5 criteria). The drinking pattern variables encompassed past year total alcohol volume and measures of heavy drinking, including the number of days consuming 12+, 8-11 and 5-7 drinks.
findingsAfter adjusting for age, alcohol volume and heavy drinking days, statistically significantly higher prevalence of DSM-IV dependence and DSM-5 AUD were observed for Black and Hispanic men who drank in the past year compared with White men who drank. For instance, the Black-White difference in AUD prevalence ranged from 3.7% (95% confidence interval = 1.1%, 6.2%) to 4.9% (2.1%, 7.8%)-, while the HispanicWhite difference ranged from 2.3% (0.1%, 4.4%) to 3.4% (1.1%, 5.6%), using different adjustment methods. Further adjusting for SES factors only moderately explained the observed disparities. We found consistent results in the estimation of disparities across all five methods.
conclusionsThere appear to be racial and ethnic disparities in alcohol-related problems between Black and Hispanic men in the United States relative to White men after alcohol drinking patterns and age are adjusted. The findings also exhibit overall consistency across the five different methods or measurement applied.
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.