A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Processing transdermal alcohol concentration (TAC) data to detect low-level drinking. | LitMetric

Background: Several studies have objectively quantified drinking through the use of Alcohol Monitoring System's (AMS) transdermal alcohol concentration (TAC) device known as SCRAM CAM. Criteria that AMS uses to detect drinking are known to be conservative and only reliably detect heavy drinking equivalent to 5 or more standard drinks. Our group has developed Research Rules used to process TAC data in a manner that will detect low-level and moderate drinking even though it is below the AMS criteria for detection.

Methods: Sixteen male and 14 female paid research volunteers wore TAC monitors for 28 days in their natural environments and responded daily to text message prompts to self-report the previous day's drinking. Current analyses describe the Research Rules that we developed and how use of those rules impacts the detection of self-reported drinking treated as the standard in sensitivity/specificity analysis.

Results: We observed 606 occurrences of positive TAC events over a total of 867 days and processed the TAC data to retain 345 as possible drinking events, even though AMS criteria confirmed drinking for only 163 of these events. The kinds of TAC events removed or retained by our rules are illustrated as cases of low and moderate drinking days that were detected by our rules but not by the conservative AMS criteria. AMS-confirmed TAC events have a high specificity (99.8%) to detect primarily heavy drinking, but have a poor sensitivity to detect lower-level drinking and a poor specificity as an indicator of alcohol abstinence. In contrast, our Research Rules detected 100% of TAC events detected by AMS but also detected 31% of the lower-level drinking events not detected by AMS, with 91% specificity.

Conclusions: Reliance upon the AMS criteria for alcohol detection affords a high specificity for detection of heavy drinking but is a poor indicator of abstinence rates. In contrast, use of our Research Rules provides more sensitive means to quantify either any drinking or low-moderate levels of drinking while still maintaining good specificity.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6559864PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.alcohol.2018.08.014DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

drinking
16
ams criteria
16
tac events
16
tac data
12
heavy drinking
12
drinking poor
12
tac
9
transdermal alcohol
8
alcohol concentration
8
concentration tac
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!