Table 3.
Study group results for alcohol consumption using the Lachenbruch method
| Outcome measure | University A (N = 2,007) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| Drinking status | Alcohol consumption among drinkers | |||||
|
|
|
|
||||
| Control group (n = 982) | Alcohol-Wise group (n = 1,025) | Control group (n = 441)a | Alcohol-Wise group (n = 441)a | Lachenbruch method | ||
| Drinkers (%) | Mean (SD) of non-zero values | W | p | |||
| Alcohol consumption | ||||||
| Total number of drinks | 44.9 | 43.2 | 18.30 (19.13) 16.37 (18.87) | 2.97 | .2262 | |
| Typical Week | 43.7 | 41.4 | 14.23 (12.82) 11.96 (12.44) | 8.02 | .0181 | |
| Drank Most | 48.3 | 45.5 | 7.71 (4.83) | 6.97 (4.96) | 7.01 | .0300 |
| BACb | 46.1 | 41.7 | 0.16 (0.10) | 0.15 (0.10) | 9.02 | .0110 |
|
| ||||||
| Outcome measure | University B (N = 2,027) | |||||
|
| ||||||
| Drinking status | Alcohol consumption among drinkers | Lachenbruch method | ||||
|
|
|
|||||
| Control group (n = 952) | Alcohol-Wise group (n = 1,075) | Control group (n = 467)a | Alcohol-Wise group (n = 562)a | |||
| Drinkers (%) | Mean (SD) of non-zero values | W | p | |||
|
| ||||||
| Alcohol consumption | ||||||
| Total number of drinks | 49.1 | 52.2 | 15.59 (16.09) | 14.73 (16.10) | 2.70 | .2588 |
| Typical Week | 48.7 | 50.7 | 10.55 (9.94) | 9.71 (8.86) | 2.73 | .2548 |
| Drank Most | 53.1 | 55.3 | 6.80 (4.26) | 6.36 (4.36) | 3.86 | .1449 |
| BACb | 50.7 | 53.1 | 0.15 (0.09) | 0.14 (0.09) | 4.28 | .1172 |
Note. W refers to the W statistic (the null hypothesis of W is a distributed as a χ2 with 2 df; see Lachenbruch, 2002). SD = standard deviation; BAC = blood alcohol content.
a
These are approximate ns because the number of cases varies slightly across outcome measures.
b
The proportion of BAC is less than Drank Most (the event from which BAC is derived) because of missing data: University A = 1.6%, University B = 0.9%.