↓ Skip to main content

Screening Caregivers of Children for Risky Drinking in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa

Overview of attention for article published in Maternal and Child Health Journal, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 Mendeley
Title
Screening Caregivers of Children for Risky Drinking in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa
Published in
Maternal and Child Health Journal, August 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10995-016-2066-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Myra Taylor, Justin Knox, Meera K. Chhagan, Shuaib Kauchali, Jane Kvalsvig, Claude Ann Mellins, Stephen M. Arpadi, Murray H. Craib, Leslie L. Davidson

Abstract

Background and Objectives Alcohol abuse, a significant health problem in South Africa, affects the ability of adults to care for children. Little is known regarding risky alcohol use among child caregivers there. A large population-based study examined the prevalence of, and factors associated with, risky drinking among caregivers of young children in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa comparing the use of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and the AUDIT-C screens for hazardous or harmful drinking (referred to here as risky drinking). Methods 83 % of child caregivers from five tribal areas were interviewed using the 10-question AUDIT to screen for risky drinking. The AUDIT-C screen, a subset of AUDIT questions, targets alcohol consumption and binge drinking. Factors associated with risky drinking were investigated using logistic regression. Results 1434 caregivers participated, 98 % female. Sixteen percent reported ever drinking alcohol. Based on AUDIT criteria for risky drinking, 13 % of the sample scored as moderate drinkers, 2 % as hazardous users, and 1 % as harmful or dependent users (identifying 3 % as risky drinkers). Using AUDIT-C criteria to identify risky drinking significantly increased the proportion of caregivers identified as risky drinkers to 9 %. In multivariate analyses, factors associated with risky drinking were similar in both screens: partner violence, smoking, HIV-infection, caring for a child with disabilities. Conclusions for Practice Since the AUDIT-C identified risky alcohol use not otherwise detected with the full AUDIT, and since resources for screening in health care settings is limited, the AUDIT-C may be a more appropriate screen in populations where binge drinking is common.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 75 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 17%
Student > Bachelor 12 16%
Researcher 10 13%
Student > Master 10 13%
Student > Postgraduate 4 5%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 18 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 16 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 15%
Psychology 7 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 18 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 August 2016.
All research outputs
#18,756,367
of 23,906,448 outputs
Outputs from Maternal and Child Health Journal
#1,618
of 2,039 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#276,834
of 373,174 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Maternal and Child Health Journal
#81
of 108 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,906,448 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,039 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 373,174 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 108 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.