Search

Background: Prenatal alcohol exposure has been linked to a host of negative outcomes, although it is largely unknown whether prenatal exposure leads to an earlier age of initiation of alcohol use or exacerbates early alcohol initiation. The current study examined whether adolescents exposed to heavy drinking during gestation began drinking earlier than their nonexposed peers and whether an earlier age of alcohol reexposure in adolescence exacerbated associations with adverse alcohol outcomes. Methods: Adolescents (17 years of age; 57% female; 96% White) from a longitudinal, population‐based cohort study, the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children, reported on the age they first consumed a whole drink and other alcohol behaviors. Adolescents' mothers also reported on their own heavy drinking during pregnancy (i.e., any consumption of 4+ U.K. units in a drinking day at either 18 or 32 weeks of gestation). Results: Survival analyses indicated that prenatal heavy drinking exposure was not associated with an earlier initiation of alcohol use after controlling for potential demographic and parental mental health and substance use confounds. Generalized negative binomial models demonstrated that prenatal heavy drinking exposure moderated associations of the age of alcohol initiation with alcohol quantity and heavy drinking frequency (but not alcohol frequency or Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test score), after controlling for the same demographic and parental confounds. Specifically, earlier alcohol initiation was associated with more adverse alcohol outcomes regardless of prenatal exposure. However, the protective associations of delayed alcohol initiation were lower among adolescents exposed to prenatal heavy drinking. Conclusions: This study provides evidence for the interplay between prenatal and postnatal alcohol exposures. Importantly, adolescents who were prenatally exposed to heavy drinking appeared to be less protected by later alcohol initiation than those who were not exposed in utero. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Alcohol consumption is influenced by the characteristics of drinking occasions, for example, location, timing, or the composition of the drinking group. However, the relative importance of occasion characteristics is not yet well understood. This study aims to identify which characteristics, and combinations of characteristics, are associated with units consumed within drinking occasions. It also tests whether accounting for occasion characteristics improves the prediction of consumption compared to using demographic information only. Methods: The data come from a cross‐sectional, nationally representative, online market research survey. Our sample includes 18,409 British drinkers aged 18 + who recorded the characteristics of 46,072 drinking occasions using 7‐day retrospective drinking diaries in 2018. We used decision tree modeling and nested linear regression to predict units consumed in occasions using information on drinking location/venue, occasion timing, company, occasion type (e.g., a quiet night in), occasion motivation, drink type and packaging, food eaten and entertainment/ other activities during the occasion. We estimated models separately for 6 age‐sex groups and controlled for usual drinking frequency, and social grade in nested linear regression models. Open Science Framework preregistration: https://osf.io/42epd. Results: Our 6 final models accounted for between 55% and 71% of the variance in drinking occasion alcohol consumption. Beyond demographic characteristics (1 to 9%) and occasion duration (24 to 60%), further occasion characteristics and combinations of characteristics accounted for 31 to 70% of the total explained variance. The characteristics most strongly associated with heavy alcohol consumption were long occasion duration, drinking spirits as doubles, and drinking wine. Spirits were also consumed in light occasions, but as singles. This suggests that the serving size is an important differentiator of light and heavy occasions. Conclusions: Combinations of occasion duration and drink type are strongly predictive of alcohol consumption in adults' drinking occasions. Accounting for characteristics of drinking occasions, both individually and in combination, substantially improves the prediction of alcohol consumption. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Information provided on glass labels may be an effective method to reduce alcohol consumption. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of glass labels conveying unit information and a health warning in reducing ad libitum alcohol consumption. Methods: A cluster‐randomized experimental study was conducted to measure the efficacy of a labeled glass in reducing alcohol consumption in a semi naturalistic bar laboratory setting, in a sample of 81 pairs (n = 162) of UK young adult drinkers. Pairs were randomized to receive two 340‐ml glasses of beer or wine: labeled or plain (control). Alcohol consumption was assessed in an ad libitum drinking period, and urge to drink was measured at baseline and postdrinking period. Focus groups (n = 2) were conducted, and thematic analysis was used to gain an insight into the acceptability and the perceived effectiveness of the glasses. Results: Mean unit consumption was 1.62 (SD ± 0.83) units in the labeled glass condition and 1.69 (SD ± 0.82) units in the non labeled glass condition. There were no significant effects of the labeled glasses on ad libitum alcohol consumption (95% CI −0.25 to 0.37, p = 0.35), despite participants (85%) noticing the information. Qualitative analysis of focus groups indicated that although participants perceived the glasses as a useful tool for increasing awareness of units and guidelines, they were viewed as limited in their potential to change drinking behavior due to the unappealing design of the glass and a view that unit guidelines were not relevant to drinking patterns or contexts. Conclusions: Labeled glasses did not change alcohol consumption in the current study, potentially due to ineffectiveness of this type of message in a young adult population. The information on the glasses was attended to, highlighting that glasses could be a feasible tool for providing information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Data-driven student drinking norms interventions are based on reported normative overestimation of the extent and approval of an average student's drinking. Self-reported differences between personal and perceived normative drinking behaviors and attitudes are taken at face value as evidence of actual levels of overestimation. This study investigates whether commonly used data collection methods and socially desirable responding (SDR) may inadvertently impede establishing 'objective' drinking norms. Methods U.K. students ( N = 421; 69% female; mean age 20.22 years [ SD = 2.5]) were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 versions of a drinking norms questionnaire: The standard multi-target questionnaire assessed respondents' drinking attitudes and behaviors (frequency of consumption, heavy drinking, units on a typical occasion) as well as drinking attitudes and behaviors for an 'average student.' Two deconstructed versions of this questionnaire assessed identical behaviors and attitudes for participants themselves or an 'average student.' The Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding was also administered. Results Students who answered questions about themselves and peers reported more extreme perceived drinking attitudes for the average student compared with those reporting solely on the 'average student.' Personal and perceived reports of drinking behaviors did not differ between multitarget and single-target versions of the questionnaire. Among those who completed the multitarget questionnaire, after controlling for demographics and weekly drinking, SDR was related positively with the magnitude of difference between students' own reported behaviors/attitudes and those perceived for the average student. Conclusions Standard methodological practices and socially desirable responding may be sources of bias in peer norm overestimation research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]