Measurement invariance of the alcohol use disorders identification test: Establishing its factor structure in different settings and across gender

Moehring, Anne; Krause, Kristian; Guertler, Diana; Bischof, Gallus; Hapke, Ulfert; Freyer‐Adam, Jennis; Baumann, Sophie; Batra, Anil; Rumpf, Hans‐Jürgen; Ulbricht, Sabina; John, Ulrich; Meyer, Christian

doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2018.05.002

Cited by 31 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Both the similarity of the fit indices of the three models, and the chi-square change statistics, indicate supporting a onefactor structure for the AUDIT, thus aligning with a number of previous studies [13,14,15]. In contrast, our results do not align with studies favouring a two-factor [27,25,28] or threefactor [29,30] AUDIT framework, respectively. This has practical implications.…”

Section: Civil Engineering Research Journalsupporting

confidence: 71%

Psychometric Properties of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and Prevalence of Alcohol use Among SA Site-based Construction Workers

Bowen¹

2021

CERJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Construction workers in SA are regarded a high-risk group in the context of HIV/AIDS. Excessive alcohol use is associated with risky lifestyles and lack of condom use, decreased uptake of HIV testing, and poor adherence to ARV treatment. Excessive alcohol consumption is also associated with depression and illicit drug use. Screening is widely employed in the detection of problematic alcohol consumption; the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) being extensively used for this purpose. This study examines both the psychometric properties of the AUDIT (one-, two-, and three-factor models) and the prevalence of alcohol use among construction workers. A field-administered survey was used to gather data from 496 male workers drawn from 18 construction sites of 7 construction firms. Descriptive statistics, internal consistency, and confirmatory factor analyses were used to analyze the prevalence of alcohol use, as well as the dimensionality, reliability, and construct validity of the AUDIT. Nearly 50% of participants reported never consuming alcohol. Including abstainers, three quarters of participants were classed as low risk (score <8). The at-risk workers were categorized as follows: 17.3% at medium risk (score 8-15); 3.6% at high risk (score 16-19); and 3.8% at very high risk (score 20+). Notably, of the 250 workers who reported using alcohol, 14.8% may be categorized as being at high-to-very high risk. In essence, 24.8% of construction participants were classed as engaging in hazardous or harmful drinking. Internal consistency of the AUDIT was very good. A 1-factor measurement model was indicated, the output indices presenting satisfactory model fit to the data. All factor loadings were significant. Concurrent validity was demonstrated. Further work is indicated in relation to items 9 and 10 of the AUDIT, as these particular items do not perform as well as the remaining items. The contribution of these two items needs to be examined using item response theory (IRT).

show abstract

Section: Civil Engineering Research Journalsupporting

confidence: 71%

Psychometric Properties of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and Prevalence of Alcohol use Among SA Site-based Construction Workers

Bowen¹

2021

CERJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The AUDIT questionnaire is a stable instrument, which reflects a broad conception of AUD. In this context, previous research found that alcohol consumption and alcohol‐related consequences may correspond to distinct aspects of problematic drinking, and the discriminatory ability of the traditional unidimensional factor structure (AUDIT overall scores ≥8) is limited to disclose these constructs 56,57 . Therefore, we evaluated the relationship between both factor structures and periodontitis to enable a better appraisal of the different constructs which impact the disease.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alcohol use disorders are associated with higher prevalence of periodontitis in a rural area of Brazil

Oliveira

Cerezer

Casarin

et al. 2021

J of Periodontal Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective The aim of the present cross‐sectional study was to determine whether alcohol use disorders (AUD) are independently associated with severe and extent cases of periodontitis in individuals living in a rural area of Brazil. Methods A representative probability sample (N = 585) was evaluated using six‐site full‐mouth periodontal examination. AUD was assessed using the alcohol use disorders identification test (AUDIT) and considered in its unidimensional and bidimensional factor structures. The first address hazardous alcohol consumption [HAC (overall scores ≥8)], and the second deals with two distinct constructs, harmful use [HU (items 1–3 scores ≥4 for men or ≥3 for women)], and alcohol‐related consequences [ARC (items 4–10 scores ≥1)]. Periodontal outcomes were defined based on the criteria proposed by the CDC‐AAP (2012) and an adaptation of the EFP‐AAP (2018) definition of generalized stages III or IV periodontitis (GP). Adjusted multilevel multinomial and binary logistic regression analysis were used with a conceptual hierarchical approach to calculate the odds ratios (OR) of periodontal outcomes. Results In the adjusted model, HU (OR = 2.69; 95% CI: 1.29–5.58) and ARC (OR = 3.79; 95% CI: 1.51–9.51) were significantly associated with higher prevalence of severe periodontitis (SP). Higher occurrence of GP was detected in individuals presenting HAC (OR = 1.88; 95% CI: 1.05–3.37) and ARC (OR = 2.90; 95% CI: 1.61–5.24). Conclusion AUD was independently associated with higher prevalence of SP and GP in individuals living in a rural area.

show abstract

“…Transitions between low‐risk and at‐risk drinking might partly be due to reliability issues since our study featured repeated screenings (Lapham et al, 2014b) with different modes of administration (Bowling, 2005). The prerequisite for reliable comparisons is measurement invariance of the AUDIT‐C, which has been established across different groups (Moehring et al, 2018) but not yet across repeated measurements. Thus, measurement error might be responsible for part of the instability of low‐risk and at‐risk drinking.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stability of At‐risk Alcohol Use Screening Results in a General Population Sample

Staudt

Freyer‐Adam

John

et al. 2020

Alcoholism Clin & Exp Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: In combination with systematic routine screening, brief alcohol interventions have the potential to promote population health. Little is known on the optimal screening interval. Therefore, this study pursued 2 research questions: (i) How stable are screening results for at-risk drinking over 12 months? (ii) Can the transition from low-risk to at-risk drinking be predicted by gender, age, school education, employment, or past week alcohol use?Methods: A sample of 831 adults (55% female; mean age = 30.8 years) from the general population was assessed 4 times over 12 months. The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption was used to screen for at-risk drinking each time. Participants were categorized either as low-risk or at-risk drinkers at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months later. Stable and instable risk status trajectories were analyzed descriptively and graphically. Transitioning from low-risk drinking at baseline to at-risk drinking at any follow-up was predicted using a logistic regression model.Results: Consistent screening results over time were observed in 509 participants (61%). Of all baseline low-risk drinkers, 113 (21%) received a positive screening result in 1 or more follow-up assessments. Females (vs. males; OR = 1.66; 95% confidence intervals [95% CI] = 1.04; 2.64), 18-to 29-year-olds (vs. 30-to 45-year-olds; OR = 2.30; 95% CI = 1.26; 4.20), and those reporting 2 or more drinking days (vs. less than 2; OR = 3.11; 95% CI = 1.93; 5.01) and heavy episodic drinking (vs. none; OR = 2.35; 95% CI = 1.06; 5.20) in the week prior to the baseline assessment had increased odds for a transition to at-risk drinking.Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the widely used time frame of 1 year may be ambiguous regarding the screening for at-risk alcohol use although generalizability may be limited due to highereducated people being overrepresented in our sample.

show abstract

Measurement invariance of the alcohol use disorders identification test: Establishing its factor structure in different settings and across gender

Cited by 31 publications

References 26 publications

Psychometric Properties of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and Prevalence of Alcohol use Among SA Site-based Construction Workers

Psychometric Properties of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and Prevalence of Alcohol use Among SA Site-based Construction Workers

Alcohol use disorders are associated with higher prevalence of periodontitis in a rural area of Brazil

Stability of At‐risk Alcohol Use Screening Results in a General Population Sample

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About