Are reconstructed self-reports of drinking reliable?

When follow-up interviews are missed, researchers sometimes try to reconstruct the data that would have been obtained by asking clients to recall the missed interval when they are interviewed at a later point. Are such data reliable? The reliability of remote reconstruction was estimated by asking 57 participants in a clinical trial to recall their drinking for the 12-month follow-up interval when interviewed, on average, 33 weeks later. These reports were obtained after delays averaging 231 days. These reconstructed reports were compared with the same clients' self-reports obtained during the 12-month interview. Reconstructed data were found to be reasonably accurate estimates of clients' reports at the time of original interview on global alcohol use variables including percentage of drinking days and total volume of consumption. No systematic bias was found for over-reporting or under-reporting at the point of reconstruction. However, on some variables (e.g. total drinks consumed), clients on average reported more drinking at the reconstruction period than during the initial interview. Discrepancies between initial and reconstructed reports were found to be unrelated to the length of delay in the second interview or to client characteristics.

Where to publish? Some considerations among English-language addiction journals.

A search and survey of specialty periodicals in the addiction field identified 35 English-language scientific journals that publish unsolicited research manuscripts. Among these, the typical addiction journal publishes a variety of types of articles in one of many different citation and referencing formats, releases four issues per year to about 1000 subscribers, annually receives more than 100 manuscripts for scientific review, and accepts 53 of them to be published without payment of an author fee. Together these 35 addiction journals publish over 1700 new articles each year. Addiction journals vary widely in acceptance rates, ranging from 26% to 95%, and averaging 53%. For better or worse, these journals offer ample opportunity for the reporting of scientific data in the addiction field.

Alcohol, drug use and consequences among Hispanics seeking treatment for alcohol-related problems.

OBJECTIVE: Ethnic differences in alcohol consumption patterns are often reported in general population surveys, but less is known about variation among ethnic groups presenting for treatment. METHOD: Within a larger clinical trial, patterns of drinking, drug use and related problems were compared for Hispanic (n = 102) and non-Hispanic white (n = 104) male (n = 154) and female (n = 52) clients presenting at a public clinic for outpatient treatment of alcohol problems. RESULTS: Relatively few reliable ethnic differences were observed in alcohol /drug use patterns. Non-Hispanic white men reported significantly more pretreatment tobacco use than did Hispanic men (84.7% vs 61.3% of past 90 days). Hispanic women reported significantly fewer legal problems (28.6% vs 83.9%), symptoms of dependence and negative consequences of drinking relative to non-Hispanic white women. Measures of acculturation and acculturative stress failed to differentiate drinking patterns among Hispanic clients. CONCLUSIONS: Within a treatment-seeking sample, Hispanics and non-Hispanics may be more similar with regard to drinking practices than is the case in the general population. High consumption, adverse consequences and dependence symptoms were characteristic of men presenting for alcohol treatment regardless of ethnic identification. In contrast, Hispanic treatment-seeking women had the lowest consumption, adverse consequences and dependence symptoms of all the groups described, and they reported significantly fewer alcohol-related problems and symptoms than did non-Hispanic women.