We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.
Item bias in the CAGE screening test for alcohol use disorders.
Journal of General Internal Medicine 1997 December
OBJECTIVE: To explore potential item bias in the CAGE questions (mnemonic for cut-down, annoyed, guilty, and eye-opener) when used to screen for alcohol use disorders in primary care patients.
DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional study, conducted in a university-based, family practice clinic, with the presence of an alcohol use disorder determined by structured diagnostic interview using the Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule.
PATIENTS: A probability sample of 1,333 adult primary care patients, with oversampling of female and minority (African-American and Mexican-American) patients.
MAIN RESULTS: Unadjusted analyses showed marked differences in the sensitivity and specificity of each CAGE question against a lifetime alcohol use disorder, across patient subgroups. Women, Mexican-American patients, and patients with annual incomes above $40,000 were consistently less likely to endorse each CAGE question "yes," after adjusting for the presence of an alcohol use disorder and pattern of alcohol consumption. In results from logistic regression analyses predicting an alcohol use disorder, cut-down was the only question retained in models for each of the subgroups. The guilty question did not contribute to the prediction of an alcohol use disorder; annoyed and eye-opener were inconsistent predictors.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite its many advantages, the CAGE questionnaire is an inconsistent indicator of alcohol use disorders when used with male and female primary care patients of varying racial and ethnic backgrounds. Gender and cultural differences in the consequences of drinking and perceptions of problem alcohol use may explain these effects. These biases suggest the CAGE is a poor "rule-out" screening test. Brief and unbiased screens for alcohol use disorders in primary care patients are needed.
DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional study, conducted in a university-based, family practice clinic, with the presence of an alcohol use disorder determined by structured diagnostic interview using the Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule.
PATIENTS: A probability sample of 1,333 adult primary care patients, with oversampling of female and minority (African-American and Mexican-American) patients.
MAIN RESULTS: Unadjusted analyses showed marked differences in the sensitivity and specificity of each CAGE question against a lifetime alcohol use disorder, across patient subgroups. Women, Mexican-American patients, and patients with annual incomes above $40,000 were consistently less likely to endorse each CAGE question "yes," after adjusting for the presence of an alcohol use disorder and pattern of alcohol consumption. In results from logistic regression analyses predicting an alcohol use disorder, cut-down was the only question retained in models for each of the subgroups. The guilty question did not contribute to the prediction of an alcohol use disorder; annoyed and eye-opener were inconsistent predictors.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite its many advantages, the CAGE questionnaire is an inconsistent indicator of alcohol use disorders when used with male and female primary care patients of varying racial and ethnic backgrounds. Gender and cultural differences in the consequences of drinking and perceptions of problem alcohol use may explain these effects. These biases suggest the CAGE is a poor "rule-out" screening test. Brief and unbiased screens for alcohol use disorders in primary care patients are needed.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app