Search

Aims To investigate the association between alcohol consumption registered daily with a digital smartphone-based diary and concentration of phosphatidylethanol (PEth) 16:0/18:1 in a population without a known alcohol use disorder (AUD), and evaluate whether prospective registration of alcohol consumption is better than retrospective registration and if the association between alcohol intake and PEth was affected by sex or body mass index (BMI). Methods A total of 41 women and 21 men without AUD-diagnosis registered their alcohol consumption prospectively with a digital diary for 14 days, and retrospectively with the Timeline Followback method in the same time interval. PEth was measured before and after the registration period. Results The correlation between alcohol consumption and PEth varied from 0.65 to 0.87. It did not depend significantly on the reporting method, and was not influenced by sex or BMI. Based on the regression coefficient, a reduction of alcohol consumption by two alcohol units (26 g of pure ethanol) per day would lead to a reduction of the PEth concentration of about 0.1 μmol/l, and vice versa. Conclusions There was a good correlation between PEth concentration and alcohol consumption, both when alcohol consumption was reported prospectively and retrospectively. The preferred cut-off for PEth should be adjusted to the level of alcohol consumption considered harmful and a purposeful trade-off between sensitivity and specificity. In order to identify persons with a daily alcohol consumption of more than two or three units of alcohol with a sensitivity of 80% or 90%, we suggest a cut-off of around 0.1 μmol/l. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The Timeline Followback (TLFB) is a widely used and well-validated interview-based tool for assessing patterns of recent health risk behavior. There is some evidence of the validity of the TLFB as a self-administered online tool for assessing alcohol use, but further research is needed to establish its validity in younger populations and populations outside the United States. Further, it is unknown how self-administered online TLFB formats compare to more timesaving and commonly used single-item alcohol questions. The primary aim of the current study was to validate a new online, self-administered TLFB for alcohol use against the TLFB interview in a sample of European (Danish) adolescents aged 16–18  years (N =  30). Methods: Participants completed a TLFB telephone interview, a self-administered online version of the TLFB, and single-item alcohol questions. Assessments were administered using a within-subject, counter-balanced design. Estimates of number of drinking days, binge-drinking days, maximum drinks consumed on one occasion, total drinks, and drinks per drinking day were compared across metrics. Results: All correlations between the drinking outcomes assessed via the TLFB interview and the TLFB online were positive, and statistically significant (rss  =  0.86– 0.94, p <  0.01). Wilcoxon signed-rank tests showed no significant differences between the TLFB interview and the TLFB online on drinking days, binge drinking days, max drinks, and total drinks. Participants reported drinking significantly more drinks per drinking day on the TLFB online (M  =  4.66) compared to on the TLFB interview (M  =  4.12; p =  0.009). Conclusion: Overall, the results support the validity of the online, self-administered TLFB in a sample of European (Danish) adolescents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ObjectiveThe Timeline Followback (TLFB) is a widely used and well-validated interview-based tool for assessing patterns of recent health risk behavior. There is some evidence of the validity of the TLFB as a self-administered online tool for assessing alcohol use, but further research is needed to establish its validity in younger populations and populations outside the United States. Further, it is unknown how self-administered online TLFB formats compare to more timesaving and commonly used single-item alcohol questions. The primary aim of the current study was to validate a new online, self-administered TLFB for alcohol use against the TLFB interview in a sample of European (Danish) adolescents aged 16–18 years (N = 30).MethodsParticipants completed a TLFB telephone interview, a self-administered online version of the TLFB, and single-item alcohol questions. Assessments were administered using a within-subject, counter-balanced design. Estimates of number of drinking days, binge-drinking days, maximum drinks consumed on one occasion, total drinks, and drinks per drinking day were compared across metrics.ResultsAll correlations between the drinking outcomes assessed via the TLFB interview and the TLFB online were positive, and statistically significant (rss = 0.86–0.94, p

Objective: This study compares three methods of cannabis and of alcohol use assessment in a sample of regular cannabis users: (a) ecological momentary assessment (EMA) repeated momentary surveys aggregated to the daily level, (b) EMA morning reports (MR) where participants reported on their total use from the previous day, and (c) retrospective timeline followback (TLFB) interviews covering the same period of time as the EMA portion of the study. We assessed the overall correspondence between these methods in terms of cannabis and alcohol use occasions and also investigated predictors of agreement between methods. Method: Forty-nine individuals aged 18-50 (Mage = 24.49, 49% female, 84% White) who reported regular cannabis use completed a 14-day EMA study. At the end of the EMA period, participants returned to the laboratory to complete a TLFB (administered via computer) corresponding to the same dates of the EMA period. Results: Daily aggregated EMA and TLFB reports showed a low to modest agreement for both alcohol and cannabis use. Overall, agreement between EMA and MR was better than agreement between EMA and TLFB, likely because less retrospection is required when only reporting on behavior from the previous day. Quantity and frequency of use differentially predicted agreement across reporting methods when assessing alcohol compared to cannabis. When reporting cannabis use, but not alcohol use, individuals who used more demonstrated higher agreement between EMA and TLFB. Conclusions: Results suggest that retrospective reporting methods assessing alcohol and cannabis should not be considered a direct "substitute" for momentary or daily assessments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The timeline followback (TLFB) interview is the gold standard for the quantitative assessment of alcohol use. However, self-reported "drinks" can vary in alcohol content. If this variability is not accounted for, it can compromise the reliability and validity of TLFB data. To improve the precision of the TLFB data, we developed a detailed standard operating procedure (SOP) to calculate standard drinks more accurately from participant reports. Method: For the new SOP, the volume and alcohol content by volume (ABV) of distinct types of alcoholic beverages were determined based on product websites and other reliable sources. Recipes for specific cocktails were constructed based on recipes from bartending education websites. One standard drink was defined as 0.6 oz (14 g) of absolute alcohol. Standard drink totals were contrasted for the new SOP approach and the standard procedure, which generally assumed that one self-reported drink was equivalent to one standard drink. Results: Relative to the standard TLFB procedure, higher numbers of standard drinks were reported after implementing the TLFB SOP. Conclusions: Variability in procedures for conversion of self-reported alcohol consumption to standard drinks can confound the interpretation of TLFB data. The use and reporting of a detailed SOP can significantly reduce the potential for such inconsistencies. Detailed and consistent procedures for calculation of standard drinks can enhance the quality of TLFB drinking data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Objectives The Timeline Followback (TLFB) was originally developed to assess alcohol consumption patterns (American Journal of Public Health, 86, 1996, 966) and has been increasingly modified for Web‐based use. Additionally, new modes of substance use administration have emerged, creating a need for an adaptable TLFB tool than can capture data such as cannabis product potency or prescription drug use. Our goal was to validate an online TLFB that reliably assesses a wide range of substances in greater detail. Methods Using a within‐subjects counterbalanced design, daily substance use data were collected from 50 college students over a 14‐day retrospective period using both the traditional in‐person TLFB and online TLFB (O‐TLFB). Results All substance use variables, including detailed measures of cannabis metrics, correlated significantly (r's ranged from .653 to .944, p

Background: We sought to compare self‐reported alcohol consumption using Timeline Followback (TLFB) to biomarker‐based evidence of significant alcohol use (phosphatidylethanol [PEth] > 20 ng/ml). Using data from patients with HIV (PWH) entering a clinical trial, we asked whether TLFB could predict PEth > 20 ng/ml and assessed the magnitude of association between TLFB and PEth level. Methods: We defined unhealthy alcohol use as any alcohol use in the presence of liver disease, at‐risk drinking, or alcohol use disorder. Self‐reported alcohol use obtained from TLFB interview was assessed as mean number of drinks/day and number of heavy drinking days over the past 21 days. Dried blood spot samples for PEth were collected at the interview. We used logistic regression to predict PEth > 20 ng/ml and Spearman correlation to quantify the association with PEth, both as a function of TLFB. Results: Among 282 individuals (99% men) in the analytic sample, approximately two‐thirds (69%) of individuals had PEth > 20 ng/ml. The proportion with PEth > 20 ng/ml increased with increasing levels of self‐reported alcohol use; of the 190 patients with either at‐risk drinking or alcohol use disorder based on self‐report, 82% had PEth > 20 ng/ml. Discrimination was better with number of drinks per day than heavy drinking days (AUC: 0.80 [95% CI: 0.74 to 0.85] vs. 0.74 [95% CI: 0.68 to 0.80]). The number of drinks per day and PEth were significantly and positively correlated across all levels of alcohol use (Spearman's R ranged from 0.29 to 0.56, all p values < 0.01). Conclusions: In this sample of PWH entering a clinical trial, mean numbers of drinks per day discriminated individuals with evidence of significant alcohol use by PEth. PEth complements self‐report to improve identification of self‐reported unhealthy alcohol use among PWH. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There are two main categories of retrospective self-report alcohol consumption measures: summary and daily drinking. Time-efficient summary measures have been criticized for being less able to capture sporadic and unpatterned drinking. A novel retrospective summary measure, the Typical and Atypical Drinking Diary (TADD), may produce more precise estimates of alcohol consumption than the gold-standard daily measure, the Timeline Followback (TLFB).Objective: To establish how accurately the TADD and TLFB retrospectively capture alcohol consumption compared to the Daily Drinking Diary (DDD) method.Method: Forty-three university undergraduates (77% female) concurrently recorded their daily alcohol consumption for 28 consecutive days using daily drinking diaries. Participants then retrospectively estimated their alcohol consumption using both the TADD and TLFB 28 days following completion of the 28-day daily consumption period.Results: When compared against the drinking data obtained from the DDD method, the TADD consistently produced accurate retrospective estimates of total alcohol consumption, number of drinking days, and number of heavy drinking episodes. Contrariwise, the TLFB significantly underestimated all aspects of drinking. Underreporting on the TLFB was hypothesized to be associated with social desirability bias.Conclusion: The TADD is a valid and reliable instrument for retrospectively measuring alcohol consumption and drinking variability in the university student population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The Timeline Followback (TLFB) is a widely used and well-validated interview-based tool for assessing patterns of recent health risk behavior. There is some evidence of the validity of the TLFB as a self-administered online tool for assessing alcohol use, but further research is needed to establish its validity in younger populations and populations outside the United States. Further, it is unknown how self-administered online TLFB formats compare to more timesaving and commonly used single-item alcohol questions. The primary aim of the current study was to validate a new online, self-administered TLFB for alcohol use against the TLFB interview in a sample of European (Danish) adolescents aged 16-18 years ( N = 30)., Methods: Participants completed a TLFB telephone interview, a self-administered online version of the TLFB, and single-item alcohol questions. Assessments were administered using a within-subject, counter-balanced design. Estimates of number of drinking days, binge-drinking days, maximum drinks consumed on one occasion, total drinks, and drinks per drinking day were compared across metrics., Results: All correlations between the drinking outcomes assessed via the TLFB interview and the TLFB online were positive, and statistically significant ( r s s = 0.86-0.94, p < 0.01). Wilcoxon signed-rank tests showed no significant differences between the TLFB interview and the TLFB online on drinking days, binge drinking days, max drinks, and total drinks. Participants reported drinking significantly more drinks per drinking day on the TLFB online (M = 4.66) compared to on the TLFB interview (M = 4.12; p = 0.009)., Conclusion: Overall, the results support the validity of the online, self-administered TLFB in a sample of European (Danish) adolescents., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Hareskov Jensen, Vallentin-Holbech, Dash, Feldstein Ewing and Rømer Thomsen.)

Objective: Concurrent and simultaneous cannabis and alcohol co-use confers risk for daily negative alcohol consequences. However, studies often treat co-use as a dichotomy, precluding examination of higher- and lower-risk co-use days. Additionally, little is known about specific alcohol consequences associated with daily co-use. Therefore, the current study 1) differentiated days based upon alcohol consumption, co-use, and simultaneous use, and 2) tested whether certain day-level use patterns conferred risk for daily alcohol consequences., Methods: College student co-users (N=489) completed an online Timeline Followback, reporting daily alcohol consumption, negative alcohol consequences, concurrent cannabis and alcohol co-use, and simultaneous co-use (SAM) on drinking days over the past month. Day-Level Latent Profile Analysis differentiated days based upon drinking quantity, co-use, and simultaneous use, and tested whether patterns of use conferred risk for overall and specific negative alcohol consequences., Results: Four day-level profiles emerged, including moderate consumption of alcohol-only days (57.5%), moderate consumption SAM use days (29.1%), higher consumption alcohol-only days (7.4%), and higher consumption SAM use days (6%). Higher consumption SAM use days were associated with more negative alcohol consequences than all other days; however, higher consumption SAM use days differed from higher consumption alcohol-only days in acute dependence symptoms. Higher consumption alcohol-only days were associated with more negative alcohol consequences than moderate consumption SAM days, particularly those that were action-oriented (i.e., dependence symptoms, blackout drinking, impaired control, risky behavior, social/interpersonal consequences)., Conclusions: Findings suggest that there are in fact lower-risk co-use days, and that links with unique negative alcohol consequences depend on levels of alcohol consumption and co-use., (© 2023 Authors et al.)

Introduction: Research investigating problem drinking often relies on retrospective measures to assess alcohol consumption behaviour. Limitations associated with such instruments can, however, distort actual consumption levels and patterns. We developed the smartphone application (app), CNLab-A, to assess alcohol intake behaviour in real-time.Methods: Healthy individuals (N=671, M age 23.12) completed demographic questions plus the Alcohol Use Questionnaire and a 21-day Timeline Followback before using CNLab-A for 21days. The app asked participants to record alcohol consumption details in real time. We compared data reported via retrospective measures with that captured using CNLab-A.Results: On average, participants submitted data on 20.27days using CNLab-A. Compared to Timeline Followback, a significantly greater percentage of drinking days (24.79% vs. 26.44%) and significantly higher total intake (20.30 vs. 24.26 standard drinks) was recorded via the app. CNLab-A captured a substantially greater number of high intake occasions at all levels from 8 or more drinks than Timeline Followback. Additionally, relative to the Alcohol Use Questionnaire, a significantly faster rate of consumption was recorded via the app.Conclusions: CNLab-A provided more nuanced information regarding quantity and pattern of alcohol intake than the retrospective measures. In particular, it revealed higher levels of drinking than retrospective reporting. This will have implications for how particular at-risk alcohol consumption patterns are identified in future and might enable a more sophisticated exploration of the causes and consequences of drinking behaviour. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Quick Drinking Screen (QDS) and Timeline Followback (TLFB), measures of alcohol use, have yielded similar reports of drinking with English speakers. The present study, a secondary data analysis, compared three measures of alcohol use (i.e., QDS, TLFB, and AUDIT) among Russian-speaking women. This is the first study to compare all three measures. This study replicated the findings of studies with English speakers and demonstrated that brief screening measures (QDS, AUDIT) provide reliable summary measures of alcohol use when compared to a detailed drinking measure (TLFB). The use of brief screening measures is recommended for use with Russian women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Some methods of retrospective data collection are known to produce reliable indicators of drug use, but the Life Event Calendar (LEC) method has not been convincingly tested. As well, previous assessments of reliability typically focus on treatment program participants or others that are not representative of criminally active populations, and address one or two substances and time frames ranging from just a few days to twelve months. Our aim is to address those gaps by examining the test-retest reliability of self-reported drug use among prisoners across a wider variety of substances and over a longer reference period than previous research. Accordingly, we analyzed data that were collected using the LEC method during 2005--2007 from a random sample of 110 minimum and medium security prisoners. Drug use over an eighteen month period preceding the arrest that led to their imprisonment was conveyed. On average, the main or first interview (test) was completed 162.4 days (SD = 62.47) following prison admission, and the retest occurred three weeks following the main interview (test). Reliability is assessed using gamma and kappa. Self-reported drug use was reliable across a variety of substances, although reliability did vary. Reliability was stronger among African American, more highly educated, and older subjects. Yet, self-reported drug use among white, less educated, and younger subjects was acceptably reliable. Considering the lengthy lag between admission and first interview, this study provides strong evidence that the LEC method is suitable to collect reliable self-reported data on multiple forms of drug use from prisoners. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Quantifying cannabis use is complex due to a lack of a standardized packaging system that contains specified amounts of constituents. A laboratory procedure has been developed for estimating physical quantity of cannabis use by utilizing a surrogate substance to represent cannabis, and weighing the amount of the surrogate to determine typical use in grams.Method: This secondary analysis utilized data from a multi-site, randomized, controlled pharmacological trial for adult cannabis use disorder (N=300), sponsored by the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network, to test the incremental validity of this procedure. In conjunction with the Timeline Followback, this physical scale-based procedure was used to determine whether average grams per cannabis administration predicted urine cannabinoid levels (11-nor-9-carboxy-Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol) and problems due to use, after accounting for self-reported number of days used (in the past 30 days) and number of administrations per day in a 12-week clinical trial for cannabis use disorder.Results: Likelihood ratio tests suggest that model fit was significantly improved when grams per administration and relevant interactions were included in the model predicting urine cannabinoid level (X2=98.3; p<0.05) and in the model predicting problems due to cannabis use (X2=6.4; p<0.05), relative to a model that contained only simpler measures of quantity and frequency.Conclusions: This study provides support for the use of a scale-based method for quantifying cannabis use in grams. This methodology may be useful when precise quantification is necessary (e.g., measuring reduction in use in a clinical trial). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Gambling self-reports may be subject to several types of bias, including social desirability bias, which may undermine their utility for capturing gambling behaviour in both research and clinical practice. Retrospective self-reports of gambling are frequently used to assess patterns of behaviour over specific periods of time, but may not be as reliable as experience sampling (ES) methods, which involve multiple assessments of gambling over the course of several days. The purpose of the current study was to examine the impact of two aspects of social desirability, impression management (IM) and self-deceptive enhancement (SDE), on the correspondence between reports of gambling assessed via ES and retrospective recall using the Gambling Timeline Followback (G-TLFB; Weinstock et al. Psychological Assessment, 16, 72-80, 2004). Participants were 81 emerging adult gamblers who completed a 30-day ES study and a retrospective assessment of their gambling. Although the overall association between social desirability and gambling reports was minimal, the correspondence between retrospective and ES reports was lower for those with higher scores on IM (for money won-lost) and SDE (for money intended to risk). Gamblers who wish to present themselves in a favourable way - either intentionally (IM) or unintentionally (SDE) - may be less reliable in their reports of gambling when asked to reflect on an extended period of time compared to when asked to provide an in-the-moment account of their gambling behaviour. These findings have important implications for understanding the circumstances under which individuals bias their retrospective self-reports of gambling and highlight the utility of more fine-grained assessments of gambling behaviour. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Self-reported daily cigarette counts typically exhibit a preponderance of round numbers, a phenomenon known as heaping or digit preference. Heaping can be a substantial nuisance, as scientific interest lies in the distribution of the underlying true values rather than that of the heaped data. In principle, we can estimate parameters of the underlying distribution from heaped data if we know the conditional distribution of the heaped count given the true count, denoted the heaping mechanism (analogous to the missingness mechanism for missing data). In general, it is not possible to estimate the heaping mechanism robustly from heaped data only. A doubly-coded smoking cessation trial data set that includes daily cigarette count as both a conventional heaped retrospective recall measurement and a precise instantaneous measurement offers the rare opportunity to directly estimate the heaping mechanism. We propose a novel model that describes the conditional probability of the self-reported count as a function of its proximity to the truth and its intrinsic attractiveness, denoted its gravity. We apply variations of the model to the cigarette count data, illuminating the cognitive processes that influence self-reporting behaviors. The principal application of the model will be to enabling the correct analysis of heaped-only data sets. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: The Timeline Followback (TLFB) was initially developed to collect retrospective self- reports of alcohol and drug use. Since its development, several peer-reviewed papers have supported it as a sound psychometric measure for substance use and for several other behaviors. Worldwide, coffee is one of the most widely consumed beverages. Although early epidemiological research suggested that drinking coffee is associated with some health problems, several recent studies have found moderate coffee consumption to have an inverse association with mortality. Because of its widespread use, a psychometrically sound measure of coffee consumption would help better inform research and public health policies.Design: This study investigated the test-retest reliability of a version of the TLFB modified to assess coffee consumption.Setting and Participants: 98 clinical psychology doctoral students completed a 30-day coffee TLFB on two occasions separated by 14 days.Measurements: Participants used a computerized Survey Monkey™ version of the coffee TLFB to report their caffeinated coffee consumption for the same 30-day interval. For the first administration participants reported their consumption for the preceding 30 days, and for the second administration they reported on the preceding 45 days which included the earlier reporting interval.Findings: Reliability coefficients were found to be very high (0.90-0.97).Conclusions: As with other substance use versions of the TLFB, these results suggest the TLFB is a good method for measuring coffee consumption in research studies and in primary health care settings where such data may be important. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: It is important to correctly understand the associations among addiction to multiple drugs and between co-occurring substance use and psychiatric disorders. Substance-specific outcomes (e.g. number of days used cannabis) have distributional characteristics which range widely depending on the substance and the sample being evaluated.Objectives: We recommend a four-part strategy for determining the appropriate distribution for modeling substance use data. We demonstrate this strategy by comparing the model fit and resulting inferences from applying four different distributions to model use of substances that range greatly in the prevalence and frequency of their use.Methods: Using Timeline Followback (TLFB) data from a previously-published study, we used negative binomial, beta-binomial and their zero-inflated counterparts to model proportion of days during treatment of cannabis, cigarettes, alcohol, and opioid use. The fit for each distribution was evaluated with statistical model selection criteria, visual plots and a comparison of the resulting inferences.Results: We demonstrate the feasibility and utility of modeling each substance individually and show that no single distribution provides the best fit for all substances. Inferences regarding use of each substance and associations with important clinical variables were not consistent across models and differed by substance.Conclusion: Thus, the distribution chosen for modeling substance use must be carefully selected and evaluated because it may impact the resulting conclusions. Furthermore, the common procedure of aggregating use across different substances may not be ideal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a prospective longitudinal study which examines pre to postimmigration alcohol use trajectories among Latino immigrants in the U.S. Topics discussed include collection of retrospective preimmigration data from a sample of 455 Cuban, South American, and Central American Latinos who immigrated less than a year prior, growth curve showing higher preimmigration alcohol use by males as compared to females, and treatment of problem-drinking behaviors in the U.S.

The article presents a study that evaluates test-retest reliability of the Timeline Followback (TLFB), a retrospective calendar-based measure of daily substance use, for cocaine, cannabis, and cigarette use for participants recruited from outpatient alcohol and drug treatment programs and general community. The topics discussed include interviewing method followed for collecting data, effect of shorter time intervals on the accuracy of the data, and statistical data involved in the study.

The article focuses on a study related to the determination of timeline followback (TLFB) in annual posttreatment drinking of problem drinkers. As per the study, 467 problem drinkers participated in a randomized controlled trial. The study mentions that two time windows including 90 days from the end of alcohol treatment and prior to the end of the treatment were evaluated. The study further concludes that 90 days prior TFLB were representative of annual posttreatment drinking.

The article presents a study of the concurrent validation of the online versions of the Timeline Followback (TLFB) interview. It compares the traditional TLFB interview format with the online-based TFLB assessments of alcohol and marijuana use among 102 college students using a randomized within-subjects design. Results suggest relatively few differences between the traditional and online versions.

Background: Level of response ( LR) to alcohol has been shown to be associated with the risk of developing alcohol dependence and can be measured using the self-rating of the effects of alcohol ( SRE) questionnaire. This study examined the heritability of the SRE-measured LR and the relationship between LR and recent alcohol drinking history ( RDH) in a predominantly African American nonalcohol-dependent population. Methods: This was a sibling study of 101 social drinkers aged 21 to 35 years recruited from the Washington, DC metropolitan area. Participants were administered the SRE to assess LR and the timeline followback ( TLFB) to assess RDH. The indices of SRE used were total SRE score ( SRTT), early drinking SRE score ( SRED), regular drinking SRE score ( SRRD), and heavy drinking SRE score ( SRHD). Pearson's product-moment correlation and linear regression were used to analyze SRE indices and RDH variables (quantity and drinks per drinking occasion). Heritability analysis was conducted using Sequential Oligogenic Linkage Analysis Routines ( SOLAR) software with SRE indices as traits of interest. Results: There was a significant relationship between SRE and RDH measures. Drinks per drinking day, maximum drinks, and quantity of drinks were significantly associated with SRTT, SRHD, and SRRD (all p < 0.05). SRTT showed significant heritability ( h2 = 0.67, p = 0.025), however, the SRE subindices ( SRED, SRRD, SRHD) were not significantly heritable. Analysis performed in the subset consisting of only African Americans ( n = 86) showed similar trends. Conclusions: LR, as measured by the SRE, is associated with RDH. The high level of heritability of the SRE total score suggests that genetics accounts for a significant proportion of the variation in the LR to alcohol in social drinkers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: In the absence of a standardized cannabis unit, self-report instruments are inadequate for accurate quantification of cannabis use. The study extends the feasibility of using a cannabis substitute to reliably and validly measure quantity of cannabis use. Method: Ninety-eight adult Australian cannabis users (M age=27.98, SD =11.10; 65.31% male) completed a 90-day Timeline Followback interview regarding their cannabis use, utilizing the cannabis substitute Marijuanilla to report on quantity of use. Ninety-two of these individuals completed the interview at two time-points, and 56 of these participants had collaterals corroborate their cannabis use reports. Results: Inter-rater reliability was excellent, while test–retest reliability was good to excellent. Intra-class correlation coefficients between participant and collateral reports, while similar to previous research, were unacceptable. Quantity of cannabis use statistically significantly added to frequency of use in predicting cannabis problems and dependence severity. Concurrent and discriminant validity were established with single-item and positive impression management measures, respectively. In addition, Marijuanilla appeared similar to one specimen of street seized cannabis, but not to two others. Importantly, participants’ cravings to use cannabis did not increase as a result of using the cannabis substitute to report on their cannabis use. Conclusions: These data suggest that utilizing Marijuanilla to facilitate the reporting of grams of cannabis use may be reliable and valid; however, such comprehensive assessment may only be necessary for clinical trials and epidemiological studies, which rely on precise estimates of cannabis use. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Few studies have assessed the convergent validity of the timeline followback for smoking (TLFB-S) among treatment-seeking smokers, and there are no studies assessing its discriminant validity. Further, no studies to date have documented the psychometric properties of the TLFB in the German population. The aim of this study was therefore to test the convergent and discriminant validity of the TLFB-S among adult, treatment-seeking smokers in Germany. In the context of a smoking cessation trial, participants (N =268) completed sociodemographic, TLFB-S and other, self-aggregated, single-item (SA) smoking measures at pretreatment. During the 12-month posttreatment period, participants completed TLFB-S and biochemically validated SA measures of smoking intensity and abstinence at regular intervals. Discriminant validity analyses showed no significant associations for substance-use and sociodemographic variables and measurement discrepancy between TLFB-S and SA measures of pretreatment smoking intensity. Convergent validity analyses indicated that TLFB-S and SA measures of smoking intensity were in high agreement at both pretreatment and posttreatment. Finally, there was high concordance between TLFB-S and SA measures of abstinence at both 1- and 12-month posttreatment. This study replicated and extended the current literature on the TLFB and showed that, even across cultures, it can be a valid measure of various smoking-related variables. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This study evaluated psychometric properties of the Timeline Followback interview—Children’s Exposure to Partner Violence (TLFB-CEPV), an event history calendar interview designed to assess children’s exposure to daily patterns of intimate partner violence. Participants were men ( N = 107) entering batterer’s treatment, their female partners, and a custodial child (6–16 years). The TLFB-CEPV asked about days of partner physical aggression and children’s exposure to these episodes, and was administered to partners at pretreatment, posttreatment, 6 and 12 months. At each assessment, the percentage of days of any child exposure (PAE) and of children’s direct exposure (PDE) to violence were calculated. Parents completed measures of partner aggression and social desirability; parents, teachers, and children completed measures of children’s adjustment. TLFB-CEPV scores had excellent temporal stability and strong evidence of concurrent, discriminant, and criterion validity. Interrater agreement for TLFB-CEPV scores was moderate at initial assessment, but high at subsequent follow-up interviews. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: A recent study comparing the Quick Drinking Screen (QDS) with the Timeline Followback (TLFB) found that in a nonclinical population of problem drinkers both measures produced reliable summary measures of drinking. The current study was designed to replicate these findings with a clinical population of alcohol abusers. The data were collected over three years (2004-2006). Method: Participants were 124 alcohol abusers who voluntarily enrolled for outpatient treatment. Over half (52.4%) were female with an average age of almost 40 years. About a third were married, had completed university, and a quarter were unemployed and nonwhite. Participants reported having a drinking problem for an average of 8.3 years, and reported drinking on about 5 days per week, averaging six drinks per drinking day. On two different occasions, they responded to two different sets of questions about their alcohol use. The instruments were: (a) the Quick Drinking Screen (QDS), a summary drinking measure, administered by telephone prior to the assessment; and (2) the TLFB self-administered by computer at the assessment. Results: As in a previous study, this study found that the QDS and the TLFB, two very different drinking measures, collected similar aggregate drinking data for four drinking variables in a clinical sample of alcohol abusers. Conclusions: When it is not necessary or not possible to gather detailed drinking data, the QDS produces reliable brief summary measures of drinking for problem drinkers. Generalization to nonclinical samples awaits further research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The impacts of two types of social desirability bias, self-deceptive enhancement (SDE) and impression management (IM), were examined on self-reports of gambling problems, measured by the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS), and recent gambling behavior, as measured by the Timeline Followback (TLFB) method, in a sample of college students (N = 191), and a sample of treatment-seeking problem gamblers (N = 49). Consistent with our expectations, IM was negatively associated with SOGS scores in both samples. IM was most highly correlated with SOGS scores among treatment-seeking participants (r = -.44, p<.01). Substantial numbers of participants in both samples had high enough IM scores as to call into question the validity of their self-report gambling data, according to published interpretive guidelines. With respect to SDE, we had predicted that it would be positively related to gambling behaviors and gambling-related problems, but found that SDE was inversely related to SOGS scores in both samples. Very little evidence was found for social desirability effects on TLFB scores. Thus, preliminary evidence was obtained that self-report data on gambling problems, but not on gambling behavior (frequency of gambling and amount of time and money spent), may be susceptible to the effects of impression management in both college students and treatment seeking gamblers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]