NR 503 Week 2: Discussion: Epidemiological Methods

Epidemiological Methods: Alcohol Misuse Screening Tool

Alcohol misuse is a significant public health problem, necessitating early detection and treatment. Accurate alcohol screening is a cost-effective, preventive service for reducing a preventable clinical burden and determining whether a patient has an alcohol use disorder (National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 2023). Among many screening tools, the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) is a standardized screening tool validated by the World Health Organization (WHO). Abbreviated as AUDIT-C (AUDIT-Consumption), the screening tool is a 10-item test that examines someone’s alcohol consumption frequency, symptoms of dependence, and negative consequences (Horváth et al., 2023; Floriombo et al., 2024). The total score ranges from 0-40; the higher the score, the higher the risk of alcohol misuse and related health concerns. The tool targets adults, young and old, with alcohol drinking problems and at risk for alcohol use disorder.

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on

Just from $13/Page

Order Essay

AUDIT-C has been tested among adults successfully. The success in research and clinical practice validates its widespread use in detecting alcohol problems and guiding clinicians in determining the support patients need to improve their health. Visontay et al. (2020) examined the gradual changes in young adults’ alcohol consumption using the AUDIT, while Duffy et al. (2023) used it to detect alcohol-related problems among adults of advanced ages. The success of these studies suggests a tool that has been tested among adults with consistent results and high dependability.

The AUDIT has a high predictive ability since ranges in scores predict the intervention a patient requires. For instance, scores ranging from 0-7 demonstrate low risk, while 20-40 show high risk and the need for referral for treatment (Floriombo et al., 2024). Reliability and validity depend on a screening tool’s ability to provide accurate results consistently. Within clinical settings, the AUDIT has adequate reliability and validity since each model (one, two, three-factor) can be used for testing with an insignificant difference (0.02) in the data’s comparative fit index (Horváth et al., 2023). This high reliability shows that the tool is sensitive to what it has been developed to measure. I would integrate the AUDIT into my advanced practice since it is accurate and easy to use. Behavioral disorders related to alcohol misuse are also widespread and require frequent screening, hence the importance of reliable alcohol misuse screening tools like the AUDIT.

References

Duffy, F. F., Sudom, K., Jones, M., Fear, N. T., Greenberg, N., Adler, A. B., … & Riviere, L. A. (2023). Calibrating the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C) for detecting alcohol-related problems among Canadian, UK and US soldiers: Cross-sectional pre-deployment and post-deployment survey results. BMJ Open, 13(5), e068619. https://doi.org/10.1136%2Fbmjopen-2022-068619

Floriombo, A. R., Generes. W. M., & Thomas, S. (2024). Assessment tools used to diagnose alcohol use disorders. American Addiction Centers. https://americanaddictioncenters.org/alcohol/assessment

Horváth, Z., Nagy, L., Koós, M., Kraus, S. W., Demetrovics, Z., Potenza, M. N., … & Bőthe, B. (2023). Psychometric properties of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) across cross-cultural subgroups, genders, and sexual orientations: Findings from the International Sex Survey (ISS). Comprehensive Psychiatry, 127, 152427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2023.152427

National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. (2023). Screen and assess: Use quick, effective methods. https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/health-professionals-communities/core-resource-on-alcohol/screen-and-assess-use-quick-effective-methods

Visontay, R., Mewton, L., Sunderland, M., Prior, K., & Slade, T. (2020). Changes over time in young adults’ harmful alcohol consumption: A cross-temporal meta-analysis using the AUDIT. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 214, 108172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2020.108172

CLICK HERE TO ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER

Week 2Epidemiological Methods

Discussion

Purpose

This discussion board content is intended to facilitate learning for students through engaging dialogues as they achieve the desired learning outcomes/competencies associated with their course in a manner that empowers them to organize, integrate, apply and critically appraise their knowledge to their selected field of practice.

The use of discussions provides students with opportunities to contribute graduate level-appropriate knowledge and experience to the topic in a safe, caring, and fluid environment that models professional and social interaction. The ebb and flow of a discussion is based upon the composition of student and faculty interaction in the quest for relevant scholarship.

Participation in the discussion generates opportunities for students to actively engage in the written ideas of others by carefully reading, researching, reflecting, and responding to the contributions of their peers and course faculty. Discussions foster the development of members into a community of learners as they share ideas and inquiries, consider perspectives that may be different from their own, and integrate knowledge from other disciplines

Course Outcomes

This assignment enables the student to meet the following course outcomes:

CO 4: Discriminate among various screening tools that may be used in the provision of care as an Advanced Practice Nurse.

Due Date

Initial prompt due by Wednesday, 11:59 PM MT of week 2
One peer and one faculty or two peer posts due by Sunday 11:59 PM MT of week 2

A 10% late penalty will be imposed for initial discussions posted after the weekly deadline regardless of the number of days late. No postings will be accepted after 11:59pm MT on Sunday (i.e. student will receive an automatic 0). Week 8 discussion closes on Saturday at 11:59pm MT.

Total Points Possible: 60 points

Preparing the Assignment

Assignment Requirements

Your course faculty will provide you with topics for the Week 2 Discussion Board. You will need to check the NR503 course Announcements for the topics for the Week 2 Discussion Board regarding screening. The week’s topics were choosen from the following website: Agency for Healthcare Research and QualityLinks to an external site.
Reply to the following prompt:

- Describe the diagnostic or screening tool selected, its purpose, and what age group it targets.
- Has it been specifically tested in this age group?
- Next, discuss the predictive ability of the test. For instance, how do you know the test is reliable and valid? What are the reliability and validity values? What are the predictive values? Is it sensitive to measure what it has been developed to measure, for instance, HIV, or depression in older adults, or Lyme disease? Would you integrate this tool into your advanced practice based on the information you have read about the test, why or why not?

You should include a minimum of two (2) scholarly articles from the last five (5) years (3 is recommended).
Respond to a minimum of two (2) individuals, peer and/or faculty, with a scholarly and reflective post of a minimum of two (2) paragraphs of 4-5 sentences. A minimum of one (1) scholarly article should be utilized to support the post in addition to your textbook.
Your work should have in-text citations integrating at a minimum one scholarly article and the course textbook. APA format should be utilized to include a reference list. Correct grammar, spelling, and APA should be adhered to when writing, work should be scholarly without personalization or first – person use.

Need assistance? Click here for the Week 2 FAQ documentLinks to an external site.? that discusses these terms.

Posting Directions

Posts should be made on a minimum of 3 separate days/dates.
All faculty replies to students must be responded to directly in the discussion board.
Minimum posting is:

- Initial discussion board post to the weekly prompt, two peer posts (if there are no faculty postings), or one peer post and a faculty post.

**To see view the grading criteria/rubric, please click on the 3 dots in the box at the end of the solid gray bar above the discussion board title and then Show Rubric.

DISCUSSION CONTENT
Category	Points	%	Description
Scholarly	13	22%	The student actively stimulates and sustains inquiry by making reflective insightful comments, asking thoughtful questions and/or engaging in a scholarly discussion. The student expresses a clear idea of the topic under discussion and sustains inquiry in order to explore relevant issues. The student recognizes values or values conflict as things that form the assumption basis of arguments and recognizes when it is important to acknowledge these values. The student recognizes the accuracy, logic, relevance, or clarity of statements. The student asks clarifying questions and knows when clarifying questions need to be asked. The student distinguishes fact from opinion.
Application	20	33%	All components of discussion prompt addressed (met) in initial posting. The student’s writing conveys an understanding of significant ideas relevant to the issue under discussion. This is indicated by integration of course and weekly objectives, as well as readings from text and articles. All posts should make correct use of terminology, precise selection of the pieces of information required to make a point, correct and appropriate use of examples and counterexamples, demonstrations of which distinctions are important to make, and explanations that are concise and to the point. Information and knowledge are accurate. The student elaborates statements with accurate explanations, reasons, or evidence from the course and/or weekly objectives. All postings integrate scholarly sources to support points consistently.
Interactive Dialogue	10	16.6%	Responds to ideas in a way that advances discussion with engagement, depth, rigor, and application. Interacts with a professional tone and is able to express opinions with ownership and without judgement. Chooses to include professional experience to the discussion board mindful of appropriateness and boundaries. Experience is integrated as it supports the discussion board topic and utilizes scholarly references to support overall topic.
	43	72%	Total CONTENT Points = 43 pts

DISCUSSION FORMAT
Category	Points	%	Description
APA	12	20%	In text citations are formatted per APA 7th ed. Reference list is formatted per APA 7th ed. Spelling, grammar, and scholarly tone are per APA 7th ed.
Spelling / Grammar etc.	5	8%	Posts should utilize correct spelling and grammar (sentence structure and avoidance of slang or casual language).
	17	28%	Total FORMAT Points = 17 pts
	60	100%	DISCUSSION TOTAL = 60 points