Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UNIPROT:Q86TM3 (cage)
 29,987 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

This study examines sensitivity and specificity figures associated with screens used to predict harmful drinking and alcohol dependence among current drinkers. The study population comes from a probability sample of emergency room patients in Jackson, MS. Data are presented by gender and injury status (injured versus noninjured) for Blacks and for Whites. The Composite International Diagnostic Interview was used to assess ICD-10 criteria for harmful drinking and alcohol dependence, which were taken as standards. Predictors include screening instruments (CAGE, AUDIT, brief MAST, TWEAK, and History of Trauma Scale), breathalyzer reading, self-reported consumption before the injury or noninjury event, quantity and frequency of drinking, and an abbreviated alcohol dependence experiences measure used in general population surveys. Single items from these screening instruments were also tested as predictors. Overall, the TWEAK and the AUDIT performed best in terms of sensitivity and specificity, but variation across subgroups suggests that the search for a good screening instrument for general use must be continued.
 ...
PMID:Ethnic differences in performance of screening instruments for identifying harmful drinking and alcohol dependence in the emergency room. 757 85

Considering the prevalence of excessive alcohol use, its adverse consequences on physical and emotional well-being, and the high degree of responsivity of early-stage drinking problems to brief intervention, screening for alcohol abuse is warranted in medical practice. We describe several practical self-report tests that can help primary care physicians screen their patients for alcohol abuse. Two of the more popular tests, the Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test and the CAGE (an acronym for questions about cutting down on drinking, annoyance at others' concern about drinking, feeling guilty about drinking, and using alcohol as an eye-opener in the morning), are comparable in sensitivity and specificity. Either test is appropriate, but the brevity of CAGE generally gives it an advantage in a busy medical office. Three new tests, the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test, the Adolescent Drinking Index, and the TWEAK also are promising. We offer guidelines for selection of screening tests for primary care practice.
 ...
PMID:Self-report screening tests for alcohol problems in primary care. 765 5

The efficacy of alcohol screening questionnaires, the TWEAK, T-ACE, NET, MAST, and CAGE, in detecting periconceptional risk-drinking, > or = 1 oz absolute alcohol/day, was investigated in 4743 African-American women attending an inner-city prenatal clinic who had reported ever drinking. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, efficiency, follow-up rates, and receiver operating characteristics of the questionnaires were examined to compare the overall effectiveness of the questionnaires and their performance at cut-points defining positive scores ranging from 1 to 3. Relatively little difference between TWEAK, T-ACE, and MAST was seen in the receiver operating characteristic accuracy indices; NET and CAGE lagged behind. Sensitivity/specificity scores for the two questionnaires most sensitive at cut-point 1 were TWEAK (87/72) and T-ACE (83/75). At cut-point 2, sensitivity was optimized with respect to specificity; TWEAK (79/83) was significantly more sensitive than T-ACE (70/85; p = 0.002). At cut-point 3, the two most sensitive tests were MAST (61/92) and TWEAK (59/94). In general, measures of merit were not greatly affected by the time between conception and the administration of the screens. Screening was most sensitive for women interviewed during the first 15 weeks of pregnancy; risk-drinkers tended to delay entry into prenatal care, increasing positive predictive values associated with screening later in pregnancy. This study confirms the utility, when screening for risk-drinking during pregnancy, of brief questionnaires that assess alcohol intake indirectly by asking women about their tolerance to alcohol's effects, psychological consequences of drinking, and significant others' concern about their drinking. It validates T-ACE and provides preliminary data indicating that TWEAK may outperform T-ACE.
 ...
PMID:Screening for pregnancy risk-drinking. 784 99

TWEAK is an acronym for Tolerance (T1 number of drinks to feel high; T2, number of drinks one can hold), Worry about drinking, Eye-opener (morning drinking), Amnesia (blackouts), and Cut down on drinking (K/C). In this study, two versions (T1 and T2) of the TWEAK were part of a questionnaire used to detect alcoholism or heavy alcohol intake in three populations, namely, alcoholics in treatment, patients in two outpatient clinics, and the general population. Similar to the CAGE and the 10-item brief MAST, the TWEAK identified most known alcoholics, but the TWEAK had a higher sensitivity and specificity than the CAGE and B-MAST in detecting alcoholism/heavy drinking in the clinical and general populations. Different cut-off values for tolerance (T1 and T2) are recommended for screening different populations.
 ...
PMID:Use of the TWEAK test in screening for alcoholism/heavy drinking in three populations. 811 29

This paper compares the sensitivity and specificity of a five-item Rapid Alcohol Problems Screen (RAPS) optimized in this sample with the CAGE, brief MAST, AUDIT, TWEAK, History of Trauma Scale and breathalyzer reading against ICD-10 criteria for alcohol dependence or harmful drinking, by gender, ethnicity and injury status in a probability sample of emergency room patients (n = 1330) from the University of Mississippi Medical Center. The RAPS performed better than all other screening instruments for the total sample of current drinkers who reported ever having had three or more drinks at one time (sensitivity of 90%, specificity of 78%), and performed consistently better across all subgroups than any other single instrument, even at alternate cut points. The Rapid Alcohol Problems Screen may hold promise for use in clinical settings in identifying those who could benefit from a brief intervention or referral for problem drinking, particularly since the instrument is short and patients need not be asked additional questions after screening positive on one of the five items. Further research is necessary to analyze and compare the performance of the RAPS with other screening instruments across demographic subgroups in other emergency room and primary care settings.
 ...
PMID:Screening for alcohol problems in the emergency room: a rapid alcohol problems screen. 874 35

A number of brief screening instruments to identify alcohol dependence exist, but the validity of these instruments across ethnic groups or regions of the country is not well established. The sensitivity and specificity of a number of standard screening instruments (CAGE, brief MAST, AUDIT, TWEAK, and RAPS), as well as other measures (History of Trauma Scale, breathalyzer reading, self-reported drinking before the event, and consuming five or more drinks at a sitting at least monthly) are compared against ICD-10 and DSM-IV criteria for alcohol dependence between probability samples of Black and White emergency room patients in Santa Clara County, CA (n = 716) and in Jackson, MS (n = 1330). Variability in the sensitivity of screening instruments among current drinkers was found to be greater between samples for both Blacks and Whites, than for Blacks compared with Whites within the same sample. The AUDIT, TWEAK, and RAPS seemed to perform well by gender and injury status for both Blacks and Whites in the two samples, and no significant differences were found in the performance of these instruments across sample sites. To evaluate the influence of regional differences in alcohol dependence on differences found in the performance of screening instruments, using logistic regression with the simultaneous entry of demographic variables (age, gender, ethnicity, injury status, and site) and drinking variables (breathalyzer reading, self-reported drinking before the event, and drinking five or more drinks at a sitting at least monthly) to predict alcohol dependence in a merged sample of these patients (Jackson vs. Santa Clara) site was not found to be significant. Data suggest that, whereas region of the country may not be important in predicting alcohol dependence in emergency room populations, regional differences in the performance of screening instruments for alcohol dependence may exist, even when ethnicity is taken into account. Given distinct regional differences in drinking patterns and problems in the U.S., further research on commonly used screening instruments is needed to determine those screeners most efficient for identifying problem drinking.
 ...
PMID:Comparison of screening instruments for alcohol problems between black and white emergency room patients from two regions of the country. 939 9

Screening instruments for problem drinking have been developed in clinical populations, and little is known of their performance in the general population. Sensitivity and specificity of the CAGE and the TWEAK for ICD-10 and/or DSM-IV criteria for alcohol dependence are compared among those sampled from the southern region in the 1995 National Alcohol Survey (n = 776), and from emergency room (ER) (n = 1327) and primary care clinic (n = 767) samples in Jackson, MS. Sensitivity of the CAGE was higher in both the ER (85%) and primary care (82%) samples than in the general population (75%), although differences were not significant, and this held for males and females alike. Sensitivity of the TWEAK was lower in the general population sample (83%) than in the ER sample (89%), but higher than in the primary care sample (75%). In the general population, sensitivity of both screeners was better (although not significantly so) among those making an ER or primary care visit during the last year than among those not doing so, with the largest difference found for the CAGE (85% vs. 65%, respectively). In a merged sample of the three sites, the interaction of site by screening instrument was not a significant predictor of alcohol dependence for either the CAGE or TWEAK. Data suggest that screening instruments may not perform as well in the general population as in some clinical populations, with more variation apparent across groups for some screeners than for others. Although further analysis is necessary to explore this issue further, attention should be given to selection of the best instrument for use in a given population.
 ...
PMID:Performance of screening instruments for identifying alcohol dependence in the general population, compared with clinical populations. 980 19

The sensitivity and specificity of several screening instruments including the CAGE, brief MAST, AUDIT, TWEAK, RAPS, and Trauma Scale, were evaluated against both ICD-10 and DSM-IV criteria for alcohol dependence and for harmful drinking and abuse in a probability sample of 586 Hispanic emergency department patients. Screening instruments were not as sensitive for females as for males, for those in the low acculturation group, or for non-dependent drinkers. Acculturation was positively associated with the likelihood of being a current drinker and among current drinkers, was positively associated with alcohol dependence and with harmful drinking or alcohol abuse.
 ...
PMID:Gender, injury status and acculturation differences in performance of screening instruments for alcohol problems among US Hispanic emergency department patients. 1008 40

The performance of alcohol use disorder screening instruments (CAGE, BMAST, AUDIT, TWEAK) at various cut points were compared between a Mexican American emergency room (ER) sample (n = 586) and a sample of ER patients in Mexico (n = 1,417) using ICD-10 and DSM-IV criteria for alcohol dependence and harmful drinking/abuse by gender and injury status. Lowering cut points improved instrument performance substantially for females in both samples. Further research is needed to explore instrument performance by gender and level of acculturation.
 ...
PMID:Screening instruments for alcohol problems: a comparison of cut points between Mexican American and Mexican patients in the emergency room. 1092 32

Fetal alcohol exposure affects approximately 1% to 3% of live births in the United States. Family physicians are in a unique position to reduce the incidence of alcohol-exposed pregnancy. Fetal alcohol exposure can be minimized through 2 general approaches: reducing alcohol consumption or increasing effective contraception among childbearing-aged women who engage in "at-risk" drinking and encouraging pregnant women to abstain from alcohol. Although no safe level of alcohol consumption during pregnancy is established, women who binge drink are more likely to deliver infants with physical and cognitive-developmental anomalies. Screening tools, such as quantity/frequency questions, the TWEAK and the T-ACE, developed specifically for prenatal care, are more useful with women than the CAGE and Michigan Alcohol Screening Test (MAST). Screening alone seems to reduce alcohol use among pregnant women. Brief interventions, including education about alcohol's effects on the developing fetus, are effective among women not responding to screening. Unfortunately, many barriers exist to effective implementation of alcohol-exposed pregnancy (AEP) prevention in the clinical setting. Designing effective office base systems so the entire burden of implementing AEP prevention activities does fall solely on the family physician is critical.
 ...
PMID:Preventing alcohol-exposed pregnancies. 1695 Dec 99


1 2 Next >>