Causal mechanisms proposed for the alcohol harm paradox-a systematic review.
Causal mechanisms proposed for the alcohol harm paradox-a systematic review.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/add.15567
复制
发表时间：
2022-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Holmes J
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Boyd J;Sexton O;Angus C;Meier P;Purshouse RC;Holmes J
酒精伤害悖论（AHP）假定，与弱势群体相比，弱势群体遭受酒精相关伤害的比率更高，尽管报告的平均消费水平相似或更低。这种关系的原因尚不清楚。本研究的目的是确定解释提出的AHP。次要目的是审查这些解释的现有证据，并调查作者是否将解释相互联系起来。这是一项系统性综述。我们检索了MEDLINE（1946年-2021年1月）、EMBASE（1974年-2021年1月）和PsycINFO（1967年-2021年1月），并辅以灰色文献的手动检索。纳入的论文要么探讨了AHP的原因，要么调查了酒精消费、酒精相关危害和社会经济地位之间的关系。论文被定为经济合作与发展组织高收入国家。为分析而提取的解释可以在实证结果中得到证明，也可以由研究人员在叙述中提出。归纳主位分析被应用于小组解释。79篇论文符合纳入标准，初步编码显示，这些论文包含41个不同的解释层次分析法。归纳专题分析后，这些解释分为16个主题，在六个广泛的领域：个人，生活方式，背景，劣势，上游和人工。与生活方式领域内的风险行为相关的解释是最常见的（n = 51）和分析（n = 21）。虽然酒精危害悖论有许多潜在的解释，但大多数研究都集中在风险行为上，而其他解释缺乏实证检验。
The alcohol harm paradox (AHP) posits that disadvantaged groups suffer from higher rates of alcohol-related harm compared with advantaged groups, despite reporting similar or lower levels of consumption on average. The causes of this relationship remain unclear. This study aimed to identify explanations proposed for the AHP. Secondary aims were to review the existing evidence for those explanations and investigate whether authors linked explanations to one another. This was a systematic review. We searched MEDLINE (1946–January 2021), EMBASE (1974–January 2021) and PsycINFO (1967–January 2021), supplemented with manual searching of grey literature. Included papers either explored the causes of the AHP or investigated the relationship between alcohol consumption, alcohol-related harm and socio-economic position. Papers were set in Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development high-income countries. Explanations extracted for analysis could be evidenced in the empirical results or suggested by researchers in their narrative. Inductive thematic analysis was applied to group explanations. Seventy-nine papers met the inclusion criteria and initial coding revealed that these papers contained 41 distinct explanations for the AHP. Following inductive thematic analysis, these explanations were grouped into 16 themes within six broad domains: individual, life-style, contextual, disadvantage, upstream and artefactual. Explanations related to risk behaviours, which fitted within the life-style domain, were the most frequently proposed (n = 51) and analysed (n = 21). While there are many potential explanations for the alcohol harm paradox, most research focuses on risk behaviours while other explanations lack empirical testing.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
6
作者：
Fillmore, KM;Golding, JM;Ferrer, HP
通讯作者：
Ferrer, HP
影响因子：
2.3
作者：
Boyle, Terry;Fritschi, Lin;Heyworth, Jane S.
通讯作者：
Heyworth, Jane S.
影响因子：
2.3
作者：
Brown, Robyn Lewis;Richman, Judith A.;Rospenda, Kathleen M.
通讯作者：
Rospenda, Kathleen M.
影响因子：
2.8
作者：
Herttua, Kimmo;Makela, Pia;Martikainen, Pekka
通讯作者：
Martikainen, Pekka
影响因子：
6.4
作者：
Conway DI;Brenner DR;McMahon AD;Macpherson LM;Agudo A;Ahrens W;Bosetti C;Brenner H;Castellsague X;Chen C;Curado MP;Curioni OA;Dal Maso L;Daudt AW;de Gois Filho JF;D'Souza G;Edefonti V;Fabianova E;Fernandez L;Franceschi S;Gillison M;Hayes RB;Healy CM;Herrero R;Holcatova I;Jayaprakash V;Kelsey K;Kjaerheim K;Koifman S;La Vecchia C;Lagiou P;Lazarus P;Levi F;Lissowska J;Luce D;Macfarlane TV;Mates D;Matos E;McClean M;Menezes AM;Menvielle G;Merletti F;Morgenstern H;Moysich K;Müller H;Muscat J;Olshan AF;Purdue MP;Ramroth H;Richiardi L;Rudnai P;Schantz S;Schwartz SM;Shangina O;Simonato L;Smith E;Stucker I;Sturgis EM;Szeszenia-Dabrowska N;Talamini R;Thomson P;Vaughan TL;Wei Q;Winn DM;Wunsch-Filho V;Yu GP;Zhang ZF;Zheng T;Znaor A;Boffetta P;Chuang SC;Ghodrat M;Amy Lee YC;Hashibe M;Brennan P
通讯作者：
Brennan P