Portuguese Validated Versions of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test: A Systematic Review of Academic and Grey Literature.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 SUBSTANCE ABUSE
Diogo Phalempin Cardoso, Daniela Oliveira, Beatriz Antunes, Rosa Saraiva, Kathryn Angus, Eugenia Gallardo, Frederico Rosário
{"title":"Portuguese Validated Versions of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test: A Systematic Review of Academic and Grey Literature.","authors":"Diogo Phalempin Cardoso, Daniela Oliveira, Beatriz Antunes, Rosa Saraiva, Kathryn Angus, Eugenia Gallardo, Frederico Rosário","doi":"10.1111/dar.14081","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Issues: </strong>The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) is one of the best screening instruments for at-risk drinkers. However, a fully validated Portuguese version is lacking. This study aimed to review validated versions of the AUDIT in Portuguese and their characteristics.</p><p><strong>Approach: </strong>A systematic search was performed in Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ÍndexRMP, LILACS, AJOL and Scielo databases, along with grey literature searches. Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the studies' methodological quality, using the QUADAS-2 checklist.</p><p><strong>Key findings: </strong>Seven studies were included in this review, six from Brazil and the other from Portugal, in a total of three versions of the AUDIT achieved through translation-back translation. Studies reported acceptable to good internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.72-0.86), moderate to excellent inter-rater reliability (K = 0.75-0.99), and poor to moderate test-retest reliability (K = 0.52-0.75). Sensitivity ranged from 52.2% to 100% and specificity from 64% to 98.9%. Only two studies reported on AUC, with values between 0.805 and 0.858. No study reported on all the performance characteristics and psychometric properties. The Portuguese translations for terms lacking a direct translation from English were heterogeneous.</p><p><strong>Implications: </strong>This review could not identify any studies rigorously validating the AUDIT in Portuguese, raising concerns regarding the AUDIT's validity as a screening tool in Portugal and other Portuguese-speaking countries. The significant variation between versions raises questions regarding its efficacy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results of this review show the need for a validation study of the AUDIT in Portugal and other Portuguese-speaking countries and the development of a new version for Portugal.</p>","PeriodicalId":11318,"journal":{"name":"Drug and alcohol review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drug and alcohol review","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/dar.14081","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Issues: The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) is one of the best screening instruments for at-risk drinkers. However, a fully validated Portuguese version is lacking. This study aimed to review validated versions of the AUDIT in Portuguese and their characteristics.

Approach: A systematic search was performed in Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ÍndexRMP, LILACS, AJOL and Scielo databases, along with grey literature searches. Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the studies' methodological quality, using the QUADAS-2 checklist.

Key findings: Seven studies were included in this review, six from Brazil and the other from Portugal, in a total of three versions of the AUDIT achieved through translation-back translation. Studies reported acceptable to good internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.72-0.86), moderate to excellent inter-rater reliability (K = 0.75-0.99), and poor to moderate test-retest reliability (K = 0.52-0.75). Sensitivity ranged from 52.2% to 100% and specificity from 64% to 98.9%. Only two studies reported on AUC, with values between 0.805 and 0.858. No study reported on all the performance characteristics and psychometric properties. The Portuguese translations for terms lacking a direct translation from English were heterogeneous.

Implications: This review could not identify any studies rigorously validating the AUDIT in Portuguese, raising concerns regarding the AUDIT's validity as a screening tool in Portugal and other Portuguese-speaking countries. The significant variation between versions raises questions regarding its efficacy.

Conclusion: The results of this review show the need for a validation study of the AUDIT in Portugal and other Portuguese-speaking countries and the development of a new version for Portugal.

葡萄牙验证版本的酒精使用障碍鉴定测试:学术和灰色文献的系统回顾。
问题:酒精使用障碍鉴定测试(审核)是对高危饮酒者最好的筛查工具之一。然而,缺乏一个完全有效的葡萄牙语版本。本研究旨在回顾葡萄牙语审计的有效版本及其特点。方法:系统检索Ovid MEDLINE、CINAHL、PsycINFO、ÍndexRMP、LILACS、AJOL和Scielo数据库,并进行灰色文献检索。两位作者独立提取数据并使用QUADAS-2检查表评估研究的方法学质量。主要发现:本次审查纳入了七项研究,其中六项来自巴西,另一项来自葡萄牙,总共有三个版本的审计通过翻译回译实现。研究报告可接受至良好的内部一致性(Cronbach α = 0.72-0.86),中等至优异的评估间信度(K = 0.75-0.99),差至中等的测试-重测信度(K = 0.52-0.75)。敏感性为52.2% ~ 100%,特异性为64% ~ 98.9%。仅有2项研究报道了AUC,其值在0.805 ~ 0.858之间。没有研究报道所有的表现特征和心理测量特性。没有直接从英语翻译过来的术语,葡萄牙语的翻译是多种多样的。含义:本综述未发现任何严格验证葡萄牙语审计的研究,这引起了对审计在葡萄牙和其他葡语国家作为筛选工具的有效性的担忧。不同版本之间的显著差异引发了对其有效性的质疑。结论:本次审查的结果表明,需要对葡萄牙和其他葡语国家的审计进行验证研究,并为葡萄牙开发一个新版本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Drug and alcohol review
Drug and alcohol review SUBSTANCE ABUSE-
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
10.50%
发文量
151
期刊介绍: Drug and Alcohol Review is an international meeting ground for the views, expertise and experience of all those involved in studying alcohol, tobacco and drug problems. Contributors to the Journal examine and report on alcohol and drug use from a wide range of clinical, biomedical, epidemiological, psychological and sociological perspectives. Drug and Alcohol Review particularly encourages the submission of papers which have a harm reduction perspective. However, all philosophies will find a place in the Journal: the principal criterion for publication of papers is their quality.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信