AIMS: The aims of the article are (a) to estimate coverage rates (i.e. the proportion of 'real consumption' accounted for by a survey compared with more reliable aggregate consumption data) of the total, the recorded and the beverage-specific annual per capita consumption in 23 European countries, and (b) to investigate differences between regions, and other factors which might be associated with low coverage (prevalence of heavy episodic drinking [HED], survey methodology).
METHODS: Survey data were derived from the Standardised European Alcohol Survey and Harmonising Alcohol-related Measures in European Surveys (number of surveys: 39, years of survey: 2008-2015, adults aged 20-64 years). Coverage rates were calculated at the aggregated level by dividing consumption estimates derived from the surveys by alcohol per capita estimates from a recent global modelling study. Fractional response regression models were used to examine the relative importance of the predictors.
RESULTS: Large variation in coverage across European countries was observed (average total coverage: 36.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] [33.2; 39.8]), with lowest coverage found for spirits consumption (26.3, 95% CI [21.4; 31.3]). Regarding the second aim, the prevalence of HED was associated with wine- and spirits-specific coverage, explaining 10% in the respective variance. However, neither the consideration of regions nor survey methodology explained much of the variance in coverage estimates, regardless of the scenario.
CONCLUSION: The results reiterate that alcohol survey data should not be used to compare or estimate aggregate consumption levels, which may be better reflected by statistics on recorded or total per capita consumption.
BACKGROUND: Binge drinking causes injury and illness. Prevalence of binge drinking doubled in 2006-2018 for women in middle adulthood (ages 30 s and 40 s); these are the first cohorts for whom attaining higher education and income (both associated with increased alcohol use) are highly prevalent. It is unknown whether recent trends in binge drinking among US women aged 30-49 differ by socio-economic status (SES).
METHODS: We examined trends in binge drinking using nationally-representative National Health Interview Surveys (2006-2018) for women age 30-49 (N = 63,426), by education (college) and family income (400 % of poverty line), controlling for age and race.
RESULTS: The odds of binge drinking increased among all women approximately 7 % annually from 2006 to 2018. The magnitude of the change increased with education; the predicted probability of binge drinking among women at lowest levels of education increased from 10 % to 13 % from 2006 to 2018 (adjusted OR [AOR] 1.02, 95 % CI 0.99, 1.04), and those with the highest education from 13%-32% (AOR 1.10, 95 % CI 1.08-1.12). Women at the lowest income increased binge drinking from 12 % to 16 % (AOR 1.03, 95 % CI 1.01-1.05) and highest income from 17 % to 36 % (AOR 1.09, 95 % CI 1.07-1.10). Interactions between education (F855(4), p < 0.001) and income (F857(3), p < 0.001) with time confirmed slope differences.
CONCLUSIONS: Nationally, women at all levels of SES increased binge drinking, but increases were most pronounced among high SES women.
PURPOSE: From 1991 to 2018, binge drinking among U.S. adolescents has precipitously declined; since 2012, depressive symptoms among U.S. adolescents have sharply increased. Binge drinking and depressive symptoms have historically been correlated, thus understanding whether there are dynamic changes in their association informs prevention and intervention.
METHODS: Data were drawn from the U.S. nationally representative cross-sectional Monitoring the Future surveys (1991-2018) among school-attending 12th-grade adolescents (N = 58,444). Binge drinking was measured as any occasion of more than five drinks/past 2 weeks; depressive symptoms were measured with four items (e.g., belief that life is meaningless or hopeless), dichotomized at 75th percentile. Time-varying effect modeling was conducted by sex, race/ethnicity, and parental education.
RESULTS: In 1991, adolescents with high depressive symptoms had 1.74 times the odds of binge drinking (95% confidence interval 1.54-1.97); by 2018, the strength of association between depressive symptoms and binge drinking among 12th(-)grade adolescents declined 24% among girls and 25% among boys. There has been no significant relation between depressive symptoms and binge drinking among boys since 2009; among girls, the relationship has been positive throughout most of the study period, with no significant relationship from 2016 to 2017.
CONCLUSIONS: Diverging trends between depressive symptoms and alcohol use among youth are coupled with declines in the strength of their comorbidity. This suggests that underlying drivers of recent diverging population trends are likely distinct and indicates that the nature of comorbidity between substance use and mental health may need to be reconceptualized for recent and future cohorts.
BACKGROUND: Alcohol consumption, even at low-levels, can not be guaranteed as safe or risk free. Specifically, the 2009 Australian National Health and Medical Research Council drinking guidelines recommend that adults should not drink more than two standard drinks on any day on average, and no more than four drinks on a single occasion. Nearly 40% of Australians aged 12 years and older drink alcohol but don't exceed these recommended limits, yet adult low-risk drinkers have been largely overlooked in Australian alcohol survey research, where they are usually grouped with abstainers. This paper examines the socio-demographic profile of low-risk drinking adults (18+ years old), compared to those who abstain.
METHODS: Data from the 2013 National Drug Strategy Household Survey were used. In the past 12 months, 4796 Australians had not consumed alcohol and 8734 had consumed alcohol at low-risk levels, accounting for both average volume and episodic drinking (hereafter low-risk).
RESULTS: Multivariate logistic regression results indicated that low-risk drinkers were more likely to be older, married, Australian-born, and reside in a less disadvantaged neighbourhood compared with abstainers. There was no significant difference by sex between low-risk drinkers and abstainers.
CONCLUSIONS: The socio-demographic profile of low-risk drinkers differed from that of abstainers. Combining low-risk drinkers and abstainers into a single group, which is often the practice in survey research, may mask important differences. The study may support improved targeting of health promotion initiatives that encourage low-risk drinkers not to increase consumption or, in view of increasing evidence that low-risk drinking is not risk free, to move towards abstinence.