Is the Full Version of the AUDIT Really Necessary? Study of the Validity and Internal Construct of Its Abbreviated Versions
Is the Full Version of the AUDIT Really Necessary? Study of the Validity and Internal Construct of Its Abbreviated Versions
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1530-0277.2010.01225.x
复制
发表时间：
2010-08-01
影响因子：
3.2
通讯作者：
Crippa, Jose A. S.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Meneses-Gaya, Carolina;Zuardi, Antonio W.;Crippa, Jose A. S.
背景：本研究的目的是在评估的心理素质的缩写版本的酒精使用障碍识别测试（AUDIT-3，AUDIT-4，AUDIT-C，AUDIT-PC，AUDIT-QF，快速，和五杆），并在比较他们的10个项目的AUDIT和CAGE在2个样本的Brazilian adults.Methods：的有效性和内部一致性的规模进行了评估，在一个样本的530名受试者参加了急诊科和心理社会护理中心的酒精和药物。DSM-IV的结构化临床访谈被用作预测有效性评估的诊断比较措施。Pearson相关系数分析了量表之间的并行效度。结果：缩略版预测效度的评估显示出较高的敏感性（0.78 ~ 0.96）和特异性（0.74 ~ 0.94）指数，曲线下面积与AUDIT一样升高（0.89和0.92筛查滥用，0.93和0.95筛查依赖）。CAGE的指数较低：滥用指数为0.81，依赖指数为0.87。AUDIT及其版本的内部一致性分析显示Cronbach的α系数在0.83和0.94之间，而CAGE的系数为0.78。10项AUDIT与其版本之间存在显著相关性，相关系数在0.91 ~ 0.99之间。同样，CAGE的结果是令人满意的（0.77），虽然劣于其他instruments.Conclusions：在这项研究中获得的结果证实了有效性的缩写版本的审计酒精使用障碍的筛查，并显示其心理测量特性是令人满意的10项审计和CAGE。
Background:This study was aimed at assessing the psychometric qualities of the abbreviated versions of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT-3, AUDIT-4, AUDIT-C, AUDIT-PC, AUDIT-QF, FAST, and Five-Shot) and at comparing them to the 10-item AUDIT and the CAGE in 2 samples of Brazilian adults.Methods:The validity and internal consistency of the scales were assessed in a sample of 530 subjects attended at an emergency department and at a Psychosocial Care Center for Alcohol and Drugs. The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV was used as the diagnostic comparative measure for the predictive validity assessment. The concurrent validity between the scales was analyzed by means of Pearson's correlation coefficient.Results:The assessment of the predictive validity of the abbreviated versions showed high sensitivity (of 0.78 to 0.96) and specificity (of 0.74 to 0.94) indices, with areas under the curve as elevated as those of the AUDIT (0.89 and 0.92 to screen for abuse and 0.93 and 0.95 in the screening of dependence). The CAGE presented lower indices: 0.81 for abuse and 0.87 for dependence. The analysis of the internal consistency of the AUDIT and its versions exhibited Cronbach's alpha coefficients between 0.83 and 0.94, while the coefficient for the CAGE was 0.78. Significant correlations were found between the 10-item AUDIT and its versions, ranging from 0.91 to 0.99. Again, the results for the CAGE were satisfactory (0.77), although inferior to the other instruments.Conclusions:The results obtained in this study confirm the validity of the abbreviated versions of the AUDIT for the screening of alcohol use disorders and show that their psychometric properties are as satisfactory as those of the 10-item AUDIT and the CAGE.