Methodological articles in addiction journals: Do we need more, less, or about the same amount?

Addiction

Volumn 99, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 145-147

  Midanik, Lorraine T ^a,b   Greenfield, Thomas K ^a,c  

^a ALCOHOL RESEARCH GROUP   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; AGE DETERMINATION; ALCOHOL ABUSE; ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION; ALCOHOLISM; DATA ANALYSIS; EDITORIAL; ETHNOLOGY; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; INTERNET; INTERVIEW; MEDICAL PROFESSION; PUBLICATION; QUESTIONNAIRE; RACE DIFFERENCE; RELIABILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; SCREENING TEST; SEX DIFFERENCE; TELEPHONE; VALIDATION PROCESS;

ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; EDITORIAL POLICIES; HUMANS; PEER REVIEW, RESEARCH; PERIODICALS; SUBSTANCE-RELATED DISORDERS;

EID: 1342343934     PISSN: 09652140     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2003.00550.x     Document Type: Editorial

References (15)

1. Frey, J. (1989) Survey Research by Telephone. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
2. Aquilino, W. S. & Wright, D. L. (1996) Susbstance use estimates from RDD and area probability samples. Public Opinion Quarterly, 60, 563-573.
3. McCabe, S. E., Boyd, C. J., Couper, M. P., Crawford, S. & D'Arcy, H. (2002) Mode effects for collecting alcohol and other drug use data: web and U.S. mail. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 63, 755-761.
4. Turner, C. F., Miller, H. G., Smith, T. K., Cooley, P. C. & Rogers, S. M. (1996) Telephone audio computer-assisted self-interviewing (T-ACASI) and survey measurements of sensitive behaviors: preliminary results. In: Bank, R., Fairgrieve, J., Gerrand, L., Orchard, T., Payne, C. & Westlake A., eds. Survey and Statistical Computing. Chesham, Bucks: Association for Survey Computing.
5. Aquilino, W. S., Wright, D. L. & Supple, A. J. (2000) Response effects due to bystander presence in CASI and paper-and-pencil surveys of drug use and alcohol use. Substance Use and Misuse, 35, 845-867.
6. Collins, R. L., Kashdan, T. B. & Gollnisch, G. (2003) The feasibility of using cellular phones to collect ecological momentary assessment data: application to alcohol consumption. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 11, 78-78.
7. Heizer, J. E., Badger, G. J., Rose, G. L., Mongeon, J. A. & Searles, J. S. (2002) Decline in alcohol consumption during two years of daily reporting. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 63, 551-558.
8. Searles, J. S., Helzer, J. E., Rose, G. L. & Badger, G. J. (2002) Concurrent and retrospective reports of alcohol consumption across 30, 90 and 366 days: interactive voice response compared with the timeline follow back. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 63, 352-362.
9. Kaskutas, L. A. & Graves, K. (2001) Pre-pregnancy drinking: how drink size affects risk assessment. Addiction, 96, 1199-1209.
10. Midanik, L. T., Hines, A. M., Greenfield, T. K. & Rogers, J. D. (1999) Face-to-face versus telephone interviews: using cognitive methods to assess alcohol survey questions. Contemporary Drug Problems, 26, 673-693.
11. Cherpitel, C. (2002) Screening for alcohol problems in the U.S. general population: comparison of the CAGE, and RAPS4, and RAPS4-QF by gender, ethnicity, and services utilization. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 26, 1686-1691.
12. Volk, R. J., Steinbauer, J. R., Cantor, S. B. & Holzer III, C. E. (1997) The Alcohol Use Disorders 15 (AUDIT) as a screen for at-risk drinking in primary care patients of different racial/ethnic backgrounds. Addiction, 92, 197-206.
13. Reinert, D. F. & Allen, J. P. (2002) The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT): a review of recent research. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 26, 272-279.
14. Cherpitel, C. J. & Bazargan, S. (2003) Screening for alcohol problems: comparison of the AUDIT, RAPS4, and RAPS4-QF among Black and Hispanic patients in an inner city emergency department. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, in press.
15. Hays, R. D., Mertz, J. F. & Nicholas, R. (1995) Response burden, reliability, and validity of the CAGE, short MAST, and AUDIT alcohol screening measures. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 27, 277-280.