当前位置: X-MOL 学术Alcohol Alcohol. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
A Comparison Between Ecological Momentary Assessment and the Adapted-Quick Drinking Screen: Alcohol Mixed With Energy Drinks.
Alcohol and Alcoholism ( IF 2.8 ) Pub Date : 2022-09-10 , DOI: 10.1093/alcalc/agab086
Sean J Johnson 1, 2 , Joris C Verster 3, 4 , Chris Alford 2, 4
Affiliation  

AIMS To compare alcohol consumption and risk-taking behaviours on alcohol mixed with energy drink (AMED) and alcohol-only (AO) drinking occasions collected via ecological momentary assessment (EMA) versus retrospective survey methods (adapted-Quick Drinking Screen: a-QDS). METHODS Completing participants were 52 university students who reported AMED consumption during the 30-day data collection period. Alcohol consumption and risk-taking behaviours were captured for recreational AMED and AO consumption occasions using a smartphone-based app across 30 days. Data were aggregated for comparison with the a-QDS conducted at the end of data collection. RESULTS Irrespective of data collection method, alcohol was consumed more frequently and at higher quantities on the heaviest drinking occasions when consumed alone compared with when it was mixed with energy drinks. Consistent with this finding, more risk-taking behaviours were experienced on AO occasions compared with AMED occasions. Compared with the a-QDS, the quantity of alcohol consumed on the average and heaviest drinking occasion was significantly higher when reported via EMA. This was consistent across both AO and AMED drinking occasions. CONCLUSION EMA provides a more valid measure of consumption quantity compared with retrospective recall, which was susceptible to under-reporting, although this was not differentially affected across consumption occasions. In line with previous research, this study demonstrated that mixing alcohol with energy drinks does not increase alcohol consumption or risk-taking behaviours.

中文翻译:

生态瞬时评估与适应性快速饮用屏幕之间的比较:酒精与能量饮料混合。

目的 比较通过生态瞬时评估 (EMA) 与回顾性调查方法收集的酒精混合能量饮料 (AMED) 和纯酒精 (AO) 饮酒场合的饮酒和冒险行为(改编的快速饮酒筛查:a-QDS )。方法 完成参与者是 52 名大学生,他们在 30 天的数据收集期间报告了 AMED 的消费情况。使用基于智能手机的应用程序在 30 天内捕获了娱乐性 AMED 和 AO 消费场合的酒精消费和冒险行为。汇总数据以与数据收集结束时进行的 a-QDS 进行比较。结果 无论数据收集方法如何,与与能量饮料混合饮用时,单独饮用酒精时,酒精在最重度饮酒场合的饮用频率更高,摄入量也更高。与这一发现一致,与 AMED 场合相比,在 AO 场合中经历了更多的冒险行为。与 a-QDS 相比,当通过 EMA 报告时,平均饮酒量和最严重饮酒量显着增加。这在 AO 和 AMED 饮酒场合都是一致的。结论 EMA 与回顾性召回相比,提供了一种更有效的消费量测量方法,回顾性召回容易被漏报,尽管这在消费场合中没有差异化影响。与以往的研究一致,
更新日期:2022-01-17
down
wechat
bug