4.2 Article

Alcohol Use and Heavy Episodic Drinking Prevalence and Predictors Among National Samples of American Eighth- and Tenth-Grade Students

期刊

JOURNAL OF STUDIES ON ALCOHOL AND DRUGS
卷 71, 期 1, 页码 41-45

出版社

ALCOHOL RES DOCUMENTATION INC CENT ALCOHOL STUD RUTGERS UNIV
DOI: 10.15288/jsad.2010.71.41

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institute on Drug Abuse [R01 DA01411]
  2. National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism [F32 AA017806]
  3. NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON ALCOHOL ABUSE AND ALCOHOLISM [F32AA017806] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  4. NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON DRUG ABUSE [R01DA001411] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Given the public health impact of adolescent alcohol use and heavy episodic drinking, we sought to identify the prevalence of types of alcohol use among national samples of 8th- and 10th-grade American students. In addition, a range of known risk factors was used to predict the most problematic type: heavy episodic use. Method: Monitoring the Future data on lifetime, past-year, and past-30-day alcohol use and on past-2-week heavy episodic drinking were available for 505,668 students from 1991 to 2007 (weighted N = 505,853; 51.5% girls; 65.3% White, 12.3% Black, 11.1% Hispanic). Logistic regression was then used in a representative subsample of 110,130 students to predict heavy episodic drinking in the previous 2 weeks. Results: In the most recent cohorts, about 1 in 10 8th graders and 1 in 5 10th graders had engaged in heavy episodic drinking in the past 2 weeks. Explanatory variables in logistic regression were largely invariant across cohort, grade level, gender, and racc/ethnicity, accounting for 48% of the variance in heavy episodic drinking. Conclusions: Heavy episodic drinking continues to be a prevalent behavior among the nation's youth, with consistent risk factors over time, highlighting the continued necessity of effective screening and prevention efforts. (J Stud. Alcohol Drugs, 71, 41-45, 2010)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据