Screening in primary care: What is the best way to identify at-risk youth for substance use?
Pediatrics, ISSN: 1098-4275, Vol: 138, Issue: 6
2016
- 53Citations
- 98Captures
- 3Mentions
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations53
- Citation Indexes51
- 51
- CrossRef20
- Policy Citations2
- Policy Citation2
- Captures98
- Readers98
- 98
- Mentions3
- Blog Mentions2
- Blog2
- News Mentions1
- News1
Most Recent News
The New Health Care: Can Doctors Talk Teenagers Out of Risky Drinking?
The answer is worth knowing. The research is lacking.
Article Description
BACKGROUND: It is important to improve primary care providers' capability to identify youth at risk for alcohol and other drug use. To our knowledge, this is the first study to use Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition criteria to compare screeners for youth for both alcohol and marijuana, given that these are the most frequently used substances by this age group. METHODS: We compared the psychometric performance of 4 screeners: the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Screening Guide (NIAAA SG), the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test, the Car-Relax-Alone-Forget-Family and Friends-Trouble (CRAFFT) screener, and the Personal Experience Screening Questionnaire Problem Severity Scale (PESQ-PS) in identifying alcohol and marijuana use outcomes. Youth age 12 through 18 (N = 1573; 27% black, 51% Hispanic) were screened with the NIAAA SG, followed by a Web survey that included the other screeners and outcomes. RESULTS: Sensitivity for alcohol outcomes indicated that the NIAAA SG (0.87) did not perform as well as the CRAFFT (0.97) or PESQ-PS (0.97) screeners but performed better than the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (0.70). The pattern for sensitivity across screeners for marijuana outcomes was similar. CONCLUSIONS: An important tradeoff in primary care settings is precision versus practicality. Because of brevity and focus on frequency of drinking, the NIAAA SG offers ease of administration and is good at identifying youth with probably problematic drinking levels. The PESQ-PS and the CRAFFT correctly identify more at-risk youth for alcohol and marijuana than the NIAAA SG. Future work is needed to elucidate how to efficiently and accurately identify at-risk youth in the primary care setting, including determining the best cutoff points to use to increase sensitivity.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85008394331&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.2016-1717; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27940696; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01797835; https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/138/6/e20161717/52614/Screening-in-Primary-Care-What-Is-the-Best-Way-to; https://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.2016-1717; https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/138/6/e20161717
American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know