ArticleAddiction (Abingdon, England)2026
Measuring lifetime alcohol exposure: A scoping review and implications for translational research and alcohol-related harm.
Article in Addiction (Abingdon, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of bariatric surgery on alcohol-use disorder and alcohol-related liver disease: A retrospective study.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2026Article
- The global epidemiology of alcohol-associated liver disease.Hepatology communications · 2026Review
- Alcohol use disorder: an Australian perspective on screening, diagnosis, treatment and prevention.Internal medicine journal · 2026Review
- Measuring lifetime alcohol exposure: A scoping review and implications for translational research and alcohol-related harm.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2026Article
- Association of long-term alcohol consumption with DSA-defined concurrent intracranial and extracranial steno-occlusive involvement in acute ischemic stroke.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsUnderstanding lifetime alcohol exposure is fundamental to appreciating the risks of alcohol dependence and the multiplicity of alcohol-related harms, such as cirrhosis. However, most research relies on self-reported alcohol use measures that rarely extend beyond recent consumption. This represents a critical limitation in assessing the relationship between alcohol exposure and biological or psychological outcomes. Concerns about recall bias may be overstated and risk obstructing translational research into long-term effects of alcohol, including treatment engagement. This scoping review examined the evidence for the reliability and validity of self-reported measures of lifetime alcohol consumption.
methodsWe searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO databases in June 2024 for English-language articles published since 1970. We included studies that performed at least one of the following psychometric assessments on a lifetime alcohol exposure measure: test-retest reliability, internal consistency, concurrent validity or construct validity.
resultsThe search identified 1607 unique records. After title and abstract screening, 24 studies underwent full-text review, with nine meeting the inclusion criteria. Most studies were conducted in North America (78%). The most frequently used instrument was the Lifetime Drinking History (LDH) (67%). Across all studies, there were 6010 participants (3478 male, 2532 female), with sample sizes ranging from 49 to 3255. In 78% of studies, alcohol exposure data were collected via face-to-face interview. Eight studies assessed test-retest reliability, with retest intervals ranging from 14 days to 13 years; none assessed internal consistency. Three studies (33%) formally assessed validity. Where assessed, test-retest reliability and concurrent and construct validity were moderate to strong. Test-retest reliability ranged from 0.67 to 0.92, and concurrent and construct validity with external reference measures ranged from 0.40 to 0.80, indicating generally acceptable performance.
conclusionsExisting instruments for measuring lifetime alcohol exposure appear to be valid and reliable and can overcome concerns regarding biases; however, these instruments vary in structure, lack standardisation and may fail to capture binge or episodic drinking, highlighting important gaps for refinement.
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.