Psychometric Analysis, Internal Structure, and Measurement Invariance of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) Scores From a Large University Sample

High test-retest reliability of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C) questionnaire completed by primary care patients in routine care

BACKGROUND

The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C) is a three-item screening measure of unhealthy alcohol use that is widely used in healthcare settings. Evidence shows high test-retest reliability of the AUDIT-C in research samples, but most studies had limited external validity and used small samples that could not be used to evaluate reliability across demographic subgroups and/or screening modalities. This study evaluates the test-retest reliability of the AUDIT-C completed in routine care in a large primary care sample, including across demographic subgroups defined by age, sex, race, ethnicity, and screening modality (i.e., completed in-clinic or online).

METHODS

We used electronic health record (EHR) data from Kaiser Permanente Washington. The sample included 18,491 adult primary care patients who completed two AUDIT-C screens 1-21 days apart as part of routine care in 2021. Test-retest reliability was evaluated for AUDIT-C total scores (0-12) and for a binary measure indicating unhealthy alcohol use (scores ≥3 women, ≥4 men). Using previously established cutoffs, we interpreted reliability coefficients >0.75 as indicating "excellent" reliability.

RESULTS

AUDIT-C screens completed in routine care and documented in EHRs had excellent test-retest reliability for total scores (ICC = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.87-0.87) and the binary indicator of unhealthy alcohol use (κ = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.78-0.80). Reliability coefficients were good to excellent across all demographic groups and for in-clinic and online modalities. Higher reliability was seen when both screens were completed through online patient portals (ICC = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.93-0.93) versus in-clinic (ICC = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.79-0.82) or when one screen was completed using each modality (ICC = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.82-0.83). Lower reliability was seen in American Indian/Alaska Native (ICC = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.75-0.87) and multiracial individuals (ICC = 0.82, 95% 0.80-0.84).

CONCLUSIONS

In real-world routine care conditions, AUDIT-C screens have excellent test-retest reliability across demographic subgroups and modalities (online and in-clinic). Future research should examine why reliability varies slightly across modalities and demographic subgroups.

Equidistant Response Options on Likert-Type Instruments: Testing the Interval Scaling Assumption Using Mplus

The purpose of the present study was to provide the means to evaluate the "interval-scaling" assumption that governs the use of parametric statistics and continuous data estimators in self-report instruments that utilize Likert-type scaling. Using simulated and real data, the methodology to test for this important assumption is evaluated using the popular software Mplus 8.8. Evidence on meeting the assumption is provided using the Wald test and the equidistant index. It is suggested that routine evaluations of self-report instruments engage the present methodology so that the most appropriate estimator will be implemented when testing the construct validity of self-report instruments.

Coping with online racism: Patterns of online social support seeking and anti-racism advocacy associated with online racism, and correlates of ethnic-racial socialization, perceived health, and alcohol use severity

Given the emerging public health concerns of online racism, we examined potential coping approaches for racial/ethnic minority adults. Using a latent class regression model (N = 407), we examined patterns of online social support seeking and anti-racism advocacy engagements that were associated with online racism among racial/ethnic minority adults. We also examined whether these patterns were associated with ethnic-racial socialization messages (cultural socialization, promotion of mistrust, preparation for racial bias), perceived health, and alcohol use severity. Three distinct latent groups were identified with meaningful group differences: triggered/reactive (alcohol use risk, higher promotion of mistrust), moderate engagement (no risk), disengaged/non-reactive (higher promotion of mistrust, higher cultural socialization, alcohol use risk) groups. Online social support seeking and advocacy engagement may have both benefits and costs in coping with online racism. Those who engage at optimal/balanced levels appear to report better well-being. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

Risk Pathways Contributing to the Alcohol Harm Paradox: Socioeconomic Deprivation Confers Susceptibility to Alcohol Dependence via Greater Exposure to Aversive Experience, Internalizing Symptoms and Drinking to Cope

Socioeconomic deprivation is associated with greater alcohol problems despite lower alcohol consumption, but the mechanisms underpinning this alcohol harm paradox remain obscure. Fragmented published evidence collectively supports a multistage causal risk pathway wherein socioeconomic deprivation increases the probability of exposure to aversive experience, which promotes internalizing symptoms (depression and anxiety), which promotes drinking alcohol to cope with negative affect, which in turn accelerates the transition from alcohol use to dependence. To evaluate this proposed risk pathway, 219 hazardous drinkers from an undergraduate population completed questionnaires assessing these constructs in a single, cross sectional, online survey. Partial correlation coefficients revealed that each variable showed the strongest unique association with the next variable in the proposed multistage model, when adjusting for the other variables. Bootstrapped serial mediation analysis revealed that the indirect pathway linking all the variables in the proposed serial order was significant, while all other permutations were non-significant. Network centrality analysis corroborated the serial order of this indirect path. Finally, risk ratios estimated by categorizing the variables suggested that socioeconomic deprivation increased the risk of aversive experience by 32%, which increased the risk of internalizing symptoms by 180%, which increased the risk of drinking to cope by 64%, which increased susceptibility to alcohol dependence by 59%. These preliminary findings need to be corroborated by future research, nevertheless, they call for prevention strategies founded on social justice and the minimization of aversive experience in socially deprived individuals to mitigate mental health problems, maladaptive coping and addiction.