A discriminant-function analysis of screening tests for excessive drinking and alcoholism.

Bernadt, Morris; Mumford, James G.; Murray, Richard M.

doi:10.15288/jsa.1984.45.81

Cited by 49 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, since the shorter and longer screening versions correlate between 0.81 and 0.97 (Selzer et al, 1975;Zung, 1979), the validity of the parent instrument should extend to the shorter version. Bernadt, Mumford, Taylor, Smith & Murray (1982) and Bernadt, Mumford & Murray (1984) directly confirmed the diagnostic efficacy of the SMAST relative to other laboratory alcoholism tests. Selzer et al (1975) has reported an alpha reliability coefficient of 0.93 for the short form.…”

Section: Subjects Were Recruited As Volunteers For This Study By Courmentioning

confidence: 64%

Psychological vulnerability to alcoholism: Studies in internal scanning deficit

Heilbrun

Cassidy

Diehl

et al. 1986

British Journal of Medical Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three studies considered the predispositional role of impaired internal scanning in alcoholism. Scanning represents the person's sensitivity to internal stimulation and the extent to which the person utilizes internally generated information. The first study found that more acute alcoholic patients displayed poorer scanning than more chronic alcoholics. This finding contra-indicates deficit scanning as an effect of alcoholism and suggests that this impairment antecedes the alcoholic disorder. Two further studies tested the possible antecedent status of deficit scanning. Adolescent wards of the juvenile court, judged to be more at risk for alcoholism, were poorer scanners than their counterparts with fewer drinking-related problems. Male college students with a greater number of alcohol-related problems also proved to be poorer scanners. It is proposed that limited scanning contributes to alcoholic vulnerability by depriving the person of information vital to the control of drinking behaviour.

show abstract

Section: Subjects Were Recruited As Volunteers For This Study By Courmentioning

confidence: 64%

Psychological vulnerability to alcoholism: Studies in internal scanning deficit

Heilbrun

Cassidy

Diehl

et al. 1986

British Journal of Medical Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…23 When made a use of discriminate analysis which confirmed the good performance of the rapid interviews and it also identified glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) as the best of the laboratory tests and of comparable efficacy to the rapid interview for the group of excessive drinkers. 25 Lastly, it is suggested that a cut-off value for a diagnostic test may be sometime unacceptable due to unpredictability of disease for various circumstances on certain grounds. A value generated by analyzing the data using any of the above method may be not acceptable clinically because it may be dealt as prerogative of a statistician.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Right choice of a method for determination of cut-off values: A statistical tool for a diagnostic test

Sharma

Jain

2014

Asian J Med Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective:The clinical diagnostic tests are generally used to identify the presence of a disease. The cutoff value of a diagnostic test should be chosen to maximize the advantage that accrues from testing a population of human and others. When a diagnostic test is to be used in a clinical condition, there may be an opportunity to improve the test by changing the cutoff value. To enhance the accuracy of diagnosis is to develop new tests by using a proper statistical technique with optimum sensitivity and specificity. Method: Mean±2SD method, Logistic Regression Analysis, Receivers Operating Characteristics (ROC) curve analysis and Discriminant Analysis (DA) have been discussed with their respective applications. Results: The study highlighted some important methods to determine the cutoff points for a diagnostic test. The traditional method is to identify the cut-off values is Mean±2SD method. Logistic Regression Analysis, Receivers Operating Characteristics (ROC) curve analysis and Discriminant Analysis (DA) have been proved to be beneficial statistical tools for determination of cut-off points. Conclusion: There may be an opportunity to improve the test by changing the cut-off value with the help of a correctly identified statistical technique in a clinical condition when a diagnostic test is to be used. The traditional method is to identify the cut-off values is Mean±2SD method. It was evidenced in certain conditions that logistic regression is found to be a good predictor and the validity of the same can be confirmed by identifying the area under the ROC curve.

show abstract

“…Among alcohol abusers, use of MCV, log GGT, and log AP correctly diagnosed over 80% of those with liver damage [33]. However, others used discriminant analysis to demonstrate the superiority of glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH, EC 1.4.1.2) over GGT, the former, when combined with a structured interview, providing a diagnostic sensitivity of 100% for excessive drinking and alcoholism [ 123). GGT was also found to be less reliable than serum apolipoproteins in staging the degree of histological liver dam age in alcoholism [124].…”

Section: Alcohol and Liver Diseasementioning

confidence: 99%