Background: The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) has been extensively researched to determine its capability to accurately and practically screen for alcohol problems.Methods: During the 5 years since our previous review of the literature, a large number of additional studies have been published on the AUDIT, abbreviated versions of it, its psychometric properties, and the applicability of the AUDIT for a diverse array of populations. The current article summarizes new findings and integrates them with results of previous research. It also suggests some issues that we believe are particularly in need of further study.Results: A growing body of research evidence supports the criterion validity of English version of the AUDIT as a screen for alcohol dependence as well as for less severe alcohol problems. Nevertheless, the cut-points for effective detection of hazardous drinking as well as identification of alcohol dependence or harmful use in women need to be lowered from the originally recommended value of 8 points. The AUDIT-C, the most popular short version of the AUDIT consisting solely of its 3 consumption items, is approximately equal in accuracy to the full AUDIT. Psychometric properties of the AUDIT, such as test-retest reliability and internal consistency, are quite favorable. Continued research is urged to establish the psychometric properties of non-English versions of the AUDIT, use of the AUDIT with adolescents and with older adults, and selective inclusion of alcohol biomarkers with the AUDIT in some instances.Conclusions: Research continues to support use of the AUDIT as a means of screening for the spectrum of alcohol use disorders in various settings and with diverse populations.

Background: Efficient, inexpensive screening for early stage alcohol problems is important in health care settings. The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) has been studied extensively to establish its value in this regard.Methods: A literature search that used EtOH as a database was conducted to identify studies published on the AUDIT through September 2001. Keywords used for the search were "Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test" and "AUDIT." All studies reporting psychometric properties of the measure were reviewed with particular attention being given to the period 1996 and later. A small number of additional references were located by noting their citation in other studies reviewed.Results: Although more research is needed on non-English versions to establish their psychometric properties, at least in its English edition, the AUDIT demonstrates sensitivities and specificities comparable, and typically superior, to those of other self-report screening measures. Test-retest reliability and internal consistency are also quite favorable. For males, the AUDIT-C, a shortened version of the AUDIT, appears approximately equal in validity to the full scale.Conclusions: Recent research continues to support use of the AUDIT as a means of screening for alcohol use disorders in health care settings in the United States.

Research on the core version of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) is reviewed. Sensitivities and specificities of the AUDIT or criteria of current hazardous use and, to a slightly lesser extent, lifetime alcohol dependence are high. In general, AUDIT scores are at least moderately related to other self-report alcohol screening tests. Several studies also show them as correlated with biochemical measures of drinking. Results of the AUDIT have also been associated with more distal indicators of problematic drinking. Indices of internal consistency, including Cronbach's alpha and item-total correlations, are generally in the 0.80's. Future directions for research on the AUDIT are suggested.

Background: Efficient, inexpensive screening for early stage alcohol problems is important in health care settings. The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) has been studied extensively to establish its value in this regard.Methods: A literature search that used EtOH as a database was conducted to identify studies published on the AUDIT through September 2001. Keywords used for the search were "Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test" and "AUDIT." All studies reporting psychometric properties of the measure were reviewed with particular attention being given to the period 1996 and later. A small number of additional references were located by noting their citation in other studies reviewed.Results: Although more research is needed on non-English versions to establish their psychometric properties, at least in its English edition, the AUDIT demonstrates sensitivities and specificities comparable, and typically superior, to those of other self-report screening measures. Test-retest reliability and internal consistency are also quite favorable. For males, the AUDIT-C, a shortened version of the AUDIT, appears approximately equal in validity to the full scale.Conclusions: Recent research continues to support use of the AUDIT as a means of screening for alcohol use disorders in health care settings in the United States.

Research on the core version of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) is reviewed. Sensitivities and specificities of the AUDIT or criteria of current hazardous use and, to a slightly lesser extent, lifetime alcohol dependence are high. In general, AUDIT scores are at least moderately related to other self-report alcohol screening tests. Several studies also show them as correlated with biochemical measures of drinking. Results of the AUDIT have also been associated with more distal indicators of problematic drinking. Indices of internal consistency, including Cronbach's alpha and item-total correlations, are generally in the 0.80's. Future directions for research on the AUDIT are suggested.

A growing body of investigations demonstrate that elevated levels of carbohydrate-deficient transferrin (CDT) effectively distinguishes alcoholics recently consuming large amounts of alcohol from light social drinkers or teetotalers. Nevertheless, important questions still remain concerning the value of CDT as a more generalized marker of alcohol consumption. Most important, the nature of the drinking pattern, including quantity and frequency, necessary to raise levels of CDT significantly remains unclear. Neither has research convincingly demonstrated that CDT is as accurate a marker for women, young adults, or non-Caucasian ethnic groups as for White, middle-aged men. Whereas CDT might serve as a useful outcome measure in trials of alcoholism treatment effectiveness, current research suggests that CDT is of limited value in identifying problematic drinking in general medical or community settings in which a broad continuum of drinkers is represented. Combining CDT with other biochemical or self-report screening measures may, however, improve sensitivity in these contexts. At present, the most accurate laboratory technique to detect CDT seems to be isoelectric focusing. Additional research, however, is needed to resolve the issue of whether CDT is best quantitated as a simple value or if its ratio to total transferrin or non-CDT results in higher predictive validity.

The data from patients and volunteers suggest that the direct ethanol metabolite ethyl sulphate has the potential to serve as a biomarker of recent ethanol intake. Because EtG and EtS are formed via different pathways they might be used conjointly, thereby increasing sensitivity.

The accurate assessment of drinking by patients with alcoholic liver disease is important both before and after liver transplantation. Unfortunately, self-reports by these individuals often underestimate their actual alcohol consumption. Several recently developed biochemical measures can provide additional information on a patient's use of alcohol. This article describes ethyl glucuronide, ethyl sulfate, phosphatidyl ethanol, and carbohydrate-deficient transferrin as biomarkers of drinking and summarizes research dealing with their application in patients with alcohol use disorders who are candidates for or recipients of liver transplantation. The article also offers suggestions for enhancing the reliability of self-report measures of drinking status.