...
首页> 外文期刊>Alcohol and alcoholism: international journal of the Medical Council on Alcoholism >Comparison of a food-frequency questionnaire method and a quantity-frequency method to classify risky alcohol consumption in women.
【24h】

Comparison of a food-frequency questionnaire method and a quantity-frequency method to classify risky alcohol consumption in women.

机译:比较食物频率问卷调查方法和数量频率调查方法对女性危险饮酒的分类。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

AIMS: Population surveys use a variety of methods to collect data on alcohol consumption. Comparability of results across methods is a prime consideration. Different methods have been demonstrated to be robust in terms of ranking individuals' alcohol use, while results have been mixed regarding comparability in terms of volume of consumption. In Australia, evidence-based guidelines have been developed that identify critical thresholds of consumption that are associated with increased risk of alcohol-related morbidity. This study investigated whether the identification of individuals consuming alcohol above these thresholds was consistent across two methods used to collect data on consumption. METHODS: The Australian Longitudinal Study of Women's Health (ALSWH) incorporated both a quantity-frequency (QF) method and a food-frequency questionnaire (FFQ) to collect data on alcohol consumption. Comparisons were made between these two methods on the ability to classify women consuming alcohol as risky (between 176 and 350 ml of pure alcohol weekly) and at high risk (greater than 350 ml of pure alcohol weekly) levels. RESULTS: The ranking of individuals was robust across methods. However, concordance in identifying risky/high-risk drinkers varied considerably based on the assumptions underlying the different methods used to calculate drinking volume using the FFQ. Similarly, the sensitivity and specificity of the FFQ methods compared to QF in terms of identifying risky/high-risk consumers were high but variable. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicated that the proportion of respondents exceeding consumption thresholds was sensitive to the instrument used to collect data on alcohol intake. Quantifying such differences is important when making comparisons between surveys that use different methodologies.
机译:目的:人口调查使用多种方法来收集酒精消费数据。跨方法的结果可比性是首要考虑因素。在对个人饮酒的排名方面,已经证明了不同的方法是可靠的,而就饮酒量的可比性而言,结果却参差不齐。在澳大利亚,已经制定了以证据为基础的指南,该指南确定了与酒精相关发病率增加风险相关的关键消费阈值。这项研究调查了在两种用于收集饮酒数据的方法中,对饮酒量超过这些阈值的个人的识别是否一致。方法:澳大利亚妇女健康纵向研究(ALSWH)结合了数量频率(QF)方法和食物频率问卷(FFQ)来收集饮酒数据。对这两种方法的能力进行了比较,以将饮酒的妇女分类为高风险(每周176至350毫升纯酒精)和高风险(每周超过350毫升纯酒精)水平。结果:各个方法的个人排名都很可靠。但是,根据使用FFQ计算饮酒量的不同方法所基于的假设,识别危险/高风险饮酒者的一致性差异很大。同样,在识别有风险/高风险的消费者方面,与QF相比,FFQ方法的敏感性和特异性很高,但变化很大。结论:这项研究表明,超过消费阈值的受访者比例对用于收集酒精摄入数据的工具敏感。在使用不同方法进行的调查之间进行比较时,量化此类差异非常重要。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号