Numerous studies leverage item response theory (IRT) methods to examine measurement characteristics of alcohol use disorder (AUD) diagnostic criteria. Less work has examined the consistency of AUD IRT parameter estimates, an essential step for establishing measurement invariance, making statements about symptom diagnosticity, and validating the theoretical construct. A Bayesian meta-analysis of IRT discrimination values for AUD criteria across 33 independent samples (Total N = 321,998) revealed that overall consistency of AUD criteria discriminations was low (generalized intraclass correlation range = .105-.249). However, specific study characteristics accounted for substantial variability, suggesting that the unreliability is partially systematic. We replicated evidence of differential item functioning (DIF) via established factors (e.g., age, gender), but the magnitudes were small compared with DIF associated with assessment instrument. These results offer practical recommendations regarding which instruments to use when specific AUD criteria are of interest and which criteria are most sensitive when comparing demographic groups.

许多研究利用项目反应理论（IRT）方法来检查酒精使用障碍（AUD）诊断标准的测量特征。检查 AUD IRT 参数估计的一致性的工作较少，这是建立测量不变性、做出有关症状诊断的陈述以及验证理论结构的重要步骤。对 33 个独立样本（总N= 321,998）表明 AUD 标准歧视的总体一致性较低（广义组内相关范围 = .105-.249）。然而，具体的研究特征导致了很大的变异性，表明这种不可靠性是部分系统性的。我们通过既定因素（例如年龄、性别）复制了差异项目功能（DIF）的证据，但与与评估工具相关的 DIF 相比，其幅度较小。这些结果提供了实用建议，涉及当对特定 AUD 标准感兴趣时使用哪些工具以及在比较人口群体时哪些标准最敏感。