4.1 Article

Drinking patterns and their gender differences in Europe

期刊

ALCOHOL AND ALCOHOLISM
卷 41, 期 -, 页码 I8-I18

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/alcalc/agl071

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIAAA NIH HHS [R21AA12941, R01AA04610] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims: To compare drinking habits and to examine differences between drinking cultures in different regions and countries in Europe; to examine gender differences in drinking habits and to compare them over countries. Methods: Data consisted of independently conducted, centrally analysed surveys in the general population aged 20-64 years in 14 European countries. Central measures were abstention, frequency and volume of drinking overall and by beverage type, amounts drunk per drinking day, and heavy episodic drinking. Results: There were clear gender differences in all drinking measures, except for wine drinking. Differences between genders were often smaller than average in northern Europe. Gender ratios did not show systematic changes by age, with the exception that young men and women differed less than older men and women in the frequency of heavy episodic drinking. The results on beverage preferences indicate that the distinction among wine/beer/spirits cultures have implicitly been based on mate drinking. Our expectation was for more daily light drinking integrated in everyday life in the Mediterranean countries, more heavy episodic drinking associated with weekends and celebrations in the North, with the traditional beer countries somewhere in between. The differences observed were usually in the direction expected. However, no country represented an ideal type of drinking culture, i.e. drinking for 'mood-changing effects' only or for,nutritional purposes' only; all countries were mixtures of these two extremes. Conclusions: There were clear and consistent gender differences in all countries, while the differences in drinking between countries and regions were not as obvious.

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

4.1
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