酒精中毒治疗研究中饮酒结果的定义和测量问题。

T F Babor, R Longabaugh, A Zweben, R K Fuller, R L Stout, R F Anton, C L Randall
{"title":"酒精中毒治疗研究中饮酒结果的定义和测量问题。","authors":"T F Babor,&nbsp;R Longabaugh,&nbsp;A Zweben,&nbsp;R K Fuller,&nbsp;R L Stout,&nbsp;R F Anton,&nbsp;C L Randall","doi":"10.15288/jsas.1994.s12.101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article reviews methodological and conceptual issues regarding the choice of drinking outcome measures in alcoholism treatment research. The following issues are discussed: Should drinking outcomes be conceptualized in terms of an underlying unitary disorder, or should provision be made for independent outcomes that cover a wide variety of dimensions? Which drinking outcomes are typically measured in treatment evaluation studies and how are they operationalized? What are the empirical associations among drinking outcome measures? If multiple outcomes are measured, which should be given primary importance? Over what period of time should treatment outcome be evaluated? What procedures can be used to detect, correct or prevent the response bias associated with verbal report methods? Because outcome measures need to fit the hypotheses and practical needs of a particular study, it is unlikely that complete standardization can be achieved across all studies. Nevertheless, given the importance of drinking outcomes and the need for economy, two primary dependent measures are recommended: (1) proportion of available drinking days abstinent; and (2) intensity of drinking, as defined by the total amount consumed (in ounces absolute alcohol) during the follow-up period divided by the number of actual drinking days. This article also proposes a strategy that may help to guide the selection of outcome measures in future research.</p>","PeriodicalId":17056,"journal":{"name":"Journal of studies on alcohol. Supplement","volume":"12 ","pages":"101-11"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1994-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.15288/jsas.1994.s12.101","citationCount":"122","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Issues in the definition and measurement of drinking outcomes in alcoholism treatment research.\",\"authors\":\"T F Babor,&nbsp;R Longabaugh,&nbsp;A Zweben,&nbsp;R K Fuller,&nbsp;R L Stout,&nbsp;R F Anton,&nbsp;C L Randall\",\"doi\":\"10.15288/jsas.1994.s12.101\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This article reviews methodological and conceptual issues regarding the choice of drinking outcome measures in alcoholism treatment research. The following issues are discussed: Should drinking outcomes be conceptualized in terms of an underlying unitary disorder, or should provision be made for independent outcomes that cover a wide variety of dimensions? Which drinking outcomes are typically measured in treatment evaluation studies and how are they operationalized? What are the empirical associations among drinking outcome measures? If multiple outcomes are measured, which should be given primary importance? Over what period of time should treatment outcome be evaluated? What procedures can be used to detect, correct or prevent the response bias associated with verbal report methods? Because outcome measures need to fit the hypotheses and practical needs of a particular study, it is unlikely that complete standardization can be achieved across all studies. Nevertheless, given the importance of drinking outcomes and the need for economy, two primary dependent measures are recommended: (1) proportion of available drinking days abstinent; and (2) intensity of drinking, as defined by the total amount consumed (in ounces absolute alcohol) during the follow-up period divided by the number of actual drinking days. This article also proposes a strategy that may help to guide the selection of outcome measures in future research.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17056,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of studies on alcohol. Supplement\",\"volume\":\"12 \",\"pages\":\"101-11\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1994-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.15288/jsas.1994.s12.101\",\"citationCount\":\"122\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of studies on alcohol. Supplement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15288/jsas.1994.s12.101\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of studies on alcohol. Supplement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15288/jsas.1994.s12.101","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 122

摘要

本文回顾了在酒精中毒治疗研究中关于选择饮酒结果测量的方法和概念问题。讨论了以下问题:饮酒的结果是否应该根据潜在的单一障碍进行概念化,还是应该为涵盖多种维度的独立结果提供规定?在治疗评估研究中通常测量哪些饮酒结果?它们是如何操作的?饮酒结果测量之间的经验关联是什么?如果测量多个结果,哪个应该被赋予首要的重要性?应该在什么时间内评估治疗结果?哪些程序可以用来检测、纠正或防止与口头报告方法相关的反应偏差?由于结果测量需要符合特定研究的假设和实际需要,因此不太可能在所有研究中实现完全标准化。然而,考虑到饮酒结果的重要性和经济的需要,建议采取两个主要的依赖措施:(1)可获得的戒酒天数比例;(2)饮酒强度,定义为在随访期间消耗的总酒精量(以盎司绝对酒精为单位)除以实际饮酒天数。本文还提出了一种策略,可能有助于指导未来研究中结果测量的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Issues in the definition and measurement of drinking outcomes in alcoholism treatment research.

This article reviews methodological and conceptual issues regarding the choice of drinking outcome measures in alcoholism treatment research. The following issues are discussed: Should drinking outcomes be conceptualized in terms of an underlying unitary disorder, or should provision be made for independent outcomes that cover a wide variety of dimensions? Which drinking outcomes are typically measured in treatment evaluation studies and how are they operationalized? What are the empirical associations among drinking outcome measures? If multiple outcomes are measured, which should be given primary importance? Over what period of time should treatment outcome be evaluated? What procedures can be used to detect, correct or prevent the response bias associated with verbal report methods? Because outcome measures need to fit the hypotheses and practical needs of a particular study, it is unlikely that complete standardization can be achieved across all studies. Nevertheless, given the importance of drinking outcomes and the need for economy, two primary dependent measures are recommended: (1) proportion of available drinking days abstinent; and (2) intensity of drinking, as defined by the total amount consumed (in ounces absolute alcohol) during the follow-up period divided by the number of actual drinking days. This article also proposes a strategy that may help to guide the selection of outcome measures in future research.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信