|
Citation
|
Ye Y, Shield K, Cherpitel CJ, Manthey J, Korcha R, Rehm J. Addiction 2019; 114(3): 462-470. |
|
Abstract
|
AIM: To compare the injury alcohol-attributable fractions (AAFs) estimated using emergency department (ED) data to AAFs estimated by combining population alcohol consumption data with corresponding relative risks (RRs).
DESIGN: Comparative Risk Assessment SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: ED studies in 27 countries (n = 24,971) MEASUREMENTS: AAFs were estimated by means of an acute method using data on injury cases from 36 ED studies combined with odds ratios obtained from ED case-crossover studies. Corresponding AAFs for injuries were estimated by combining population-level data on alcohol consumption obtained from the Global Information System on Alcohol and Health with corresponding RRs obtained from a previous meta-analysis.
FINDINGS: ED-based injury AAF estimates ranged from 5% (Canada 2002 and the Czech Republic) to 40% (South Africa), with a mean AAF across all studies of 15% (19% for males and 8% for females). Population-based injury AAF estimates ranged from 21% (India) to 51% (Spain and the Czech Republic), with a mean AAF across all country-years of 37% (43% for males and 23% for females). The Pearson correlation coefficient for the two types of injury AAF estimates was 0.09 for the total, 0.06 for males, and 0.32 for females.
CONCLUSIONS: Two methods of estimating the injury alcohol-attributable fractions (AAFs) - emergency department data versus population method - produce widely differing results. Across 36 country-years, the mean AAF using the population method was 36.8%, more than twice as large as emergency department data-based acute estimates, which average 15.4%.
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Language: en |