Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2023 Jul 1.
Published in final edited form as: Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2021 Mar 16;31(7):1–11. doi: 10.1007/s00787-020-01712-3

Table 4.

Potential impact fractions of baseline predictors on risk for 12-month hazardous drinking or AUD at follow-up

Difference distribution 12-month AUD at follow-up among students with and without hazardous drinking (no AUD) at baselinea 12-month hazardous drinking or AUD at follow-up among students without hazardous drinking or AUD at baselineb
aPIF%c aPIF%c aPIF%c aPIF%c
AUDIT consumption score - 1 Standard Deviation 36.1 80.0 34.0 46.5
AUDIT dependence score - 1 Standard Deviation 15.6 6.4
AUDIT alcohol-related problems score - 1 Standard Deviation 23.4 11.2
Hazardous drinking no hazardous drinking 50.8 / /
All traumatic experiences no traumatic experiences / / 0.0d 0.0d
All 12-month stressful events no 12-month stressful events 15.0 15.0 5.5 5.5
All mental disorders no mental disorders / / 0.0d 0.0d

AUD = Alcohol use disorder; AUDIT= Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test

a

The final selected multivariate model includes the three AUDIT subscales, the hazardous drinking dummy variable, all nine sociodemographic variables, and all seven 12-month stressful experiences under study.

b

The final selected multivariate model includes the three AUDIT subscales, all nine sociodemographic variables, all seven childhood-adolescent traumatic experiences, all seven 12-month stressful experiences, all eight mental disorders, and 12-month self-injurious thoughts and behaviours.

c

aPIF = adjusted Potential Impact Fraction. The PIF represents the number of outcome cases that are potentially impacted (reduced) after a change in the exposure of a related continuous of categorical predictor.