A new study aimed at quantifying the relationship between alcohol use indicators (e.g., frequency, quantity, binge/heavy drinking) and alcohol-related consequences using data from 42 studies that included both college student and clinical samples. In order to determine the effect size of the relationship between alcohol use and alcohol-related consequences, data from college student participants (N = 15,618) was gathered from 33 datasets and data from clinical participants (N = 4,527) was gathered from 9 datasets. Among college student datasets, alcohol consumption was measured using the Daily Drinking Questionnaire (DDQ) or the Quantity/Frequency/Peak Index (QFI). Among clinical samples, it was measured using either the Timeline Follow-Back or the Form 90 Interview. For college student datasets, negative alcohol-related consequences were assessed using the Young Adult Alcohol Consequences Questionnaire (YAACQ), the Young Adult Alcohol Problems Screening Test (YAAPST) or the Rutgers Alcohol Problem Index (RAPI). For clinical samples, they were assessed using the Drinker Inventory of Consequences (DrInC), the Short Inventory of Problems (SIP) or the RAPI. The authors used cross-sectional correlation coefficients to estimate the strength of associations between alcohol use indicators and alcohol-related consequences as well as random-effects meta-analytic techniques to assess for heterogeneity in effect sizes. Results showed that between 15.44% and 22.47% of the variance in negative alcohol-related consequences is accounted for by alcohol use indicators among college student samples. In other words, between 77.53% and 84.56% of the variance in alcohol-related consequences was not explained by the specific alcohol use indicators that were examined. Similarly, for clinical samples, the unexplained variability in consequences was 97.5%, 92.29% and 86.53% for percent drinking days, percent heavy drinking days and drinks per drinking days, respectively.
Take away: This study found that alcohol use indicators in both college student and clinical samples did not explain the clear majority of the variability in alcohol-related consequences, suggesting that experiencing alcohol-related consequences results from factors extending beyond alcohol use.