Russell M, Welte J W, Barnes G M
Research Institute on Alcoholism, Buffalo, NY 14203.
Br J Addict. 1991 Apr;86(4):409-17. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.1991.tb03418.x.
Estimates of alcohol consumption (ounces of absolute alcohol per day, AA) based on beverage-specific and global quantity-frequency (QF) questions were compared in a survey representative of the adult drinking population in New York State. Beverage-specific AA estimates were higher than global (0.72, 95% confidence intervals = 0.68, 0.76) compared to 0.49 (95% confidence intervals = 0.47, 0.51), although estimates were highly correlated (r = 0.75). Discrepancies between beverage specific and global AA estimates increased as the number of beverages and the amount drunk increased. Sociodemographic characteristics were not significantly related to differences between beverage-specific and global AA estimates after adjusting for the amount drunk; however, drinking patterns did influence the differences. It was concluded that beverage-specific QF questions are probably more valid measures of alcohol consumption than global QF questions, but that the global questions provide useful information. Parallel analyses of variant global QF questions employed in the first US Health and Nutrition Examination Survey obtained similar results.
在一项代表纽约州成年饮酒人群的调查中,对基于特定饮料和总体数量频率(QF)问题得出的酒精摄入量估计值(每天纯酒精盎司数,AA)进行了比较。特定饮料的AA估计值高于总体估计值(0.72,95%置信区间 = 0.68,0.76),而总体估计值为0.49(95%置信区间 = 0.47,0.51),尽管估计值高度相关(r = 0.75)。随着饮料数量和饮酒量的增加,特定饮料和总体AA估计值之间的差异也会增大。在对饮酒量进行调整后,社会人口学特征与特定饮料和总体AA估计值之间的差异无显著关联;然而,饮酒模式确实会影响这些差异。研究得出结论,特定饮料的QF问题可能比总体QF问题更能有效衡量酒精摄入量,但总体问题也能提供有用信息。对美国第一次健康与营养检查调查中使用的不同总体QF问题进行的平行分析也得到了类似结果。