SAFETYLIT WEEKLY UPDATE

We compile citations and summaries of about 400 new articles every week.
RSS Feed

HELP: Tutorials | FAQ
CONTACT US: Contact info

Search Results

Journal Article

Citation

Jr PT, El-Sabawi T, Cangin C. J. Am. Coll. Health 2016; 64(5): 397-403.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2016, Informa - Taylor and Francis Group)

DOI

10.1080/07448481.2016.1168429

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To improve the CAGE (Cut down, Annoyed, Guilty, Eye opener) questionnaire's predictive accuracy in screening college students. Participants: The sample consisted of 219 midwestern university students who self-administered a confidential survey.

METHODS: Exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, receiver operating characteristics (ROC), and Cronbach's alpha were used to analyze factor structure, validity, and reliability.

RESULTS: The modified CAGE correctly classified students with alcohol abuse ("AA students"; area under the curve [AUC] = 0.7765) and students with alcohol dependency ("AD students"; AUC = 0.8392) more often than CAGE (AA students: AUC = 0.6977; AD students: AUC = 0.7437), and these differences are statistically significant (AA students: χ2(1) = 14.72, p <.001; AD students: χ2(1) = 7.71, p <.01). Using 2-point cut scores, CAGE correctly identified 59.38% of AD students as AD, whereas the modified CAGE correctly identified 87% of AD students as AD. Using 1-point cut scores, CAGE correctly identified 65% AA students, whereas the modified CAGE identified 85.29%.

CONCLUSIONS: The modified CAGE has better accuracy than CAGE in predicting AA and AD among college populations.


Language: en

NEW SEARCH


All SafetyLit records are available for automatic download to Zotero & Mendeley
Print