INTRODUCTION AND AIM: This study, which builds on previous research demonstrating that drinking motives are associated with adverse consequences, investigates the associations between drinking motives and non-alcohol-attributed adverse consequences and disentangles alcohol-related and direct effects.

DESIGN AND METHOD: On the basis of a sample of 22 841 alcohol-using 13- to 16-year-olds (50.6% female) from Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Ireland, Portugal, Scotland, Slovakia, Switzerland and Wales, structural equation models were used to estimate direct and indirect effects. Additionally, differences across countries were tested in a multigroup analysis.

RESULTS: The indirect effect (via alcohol use) was greater for injuries and academic problems than for more general outcomes such as life dissatisfaction and negative body image. For social, enhancement and coping motives, we found positive indirect effects (via alcohol use) on injuries and academic problems; the association was negative for conformity motives. The direct effect, that is, the effect above and beyond alcohol use, indicated more negative consequences among those who tended to drink more frequently for coping motives. More negative consequences, such as injuries and negative body image, were also found among those who drink for conformity motives. The pattern of association was largely comparable across countries.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: While the actual mean level of drinking motives, alcohol use and adverse consequence varied across countries, the consistency of association patterns implies that drinking motive-inspired health promotion efforts are likely to be beneficial across Europe. This is particularly important for coping drinkers because they are especially prone to adverse consequences over and above their alcohol use.

[Wicki M, Kuntsche E, Eichenberger Y, Aasvee K, Bendtsen P, Dankulincova Veselska Z, Demetrovics Z, Dzielska A, Farkas J, de Matos MG, Roberts C, Tynjala J, Valimaa R, Vieno A. Different drinking motives, different adverse consequences? Evidence among adolescents from 10 European countries. Drug Alcohol Rev 2017;00:000-000]

Published in Drinking Patterns

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: The practice and adverse consequences of pre-drinking have been documented within a dozen countries, but little remains known about the differences between countries or the country-specific determinants of pre-drinking. This study aims to estimate the percentage of pre-drinkers in different countries and the impact of country-level indicators such as the price of alcohol and the prevalence of drinkers and of heavy drinkers.

DESIGN AND METHODS: Using data from the Global Drug Survey, the percentage of pre-drinkers was estimated for 25 countries from 65 126 respondents. Bivariate and multivariate multilevel models were used to model the impact of the on-premise/off-premise drinks price ratio, the prevalence of current drinkers and of heavy drinkers on the percentage of pre-drinkers.

RESULTS: The estimated percentage of pre-drinkers per country ranged from 17.7% (Greece) to 85.4% (Ireland). Across all countries, the higher the prevalence of current drinkers, the higher the percentage of pre-drinkers. In addition, an interaction between the prevalence of heavy drinkers and the price ratio was found. In countries with a low price ratio, the higher the prevalence of heavy drinkers, the higher the percentage of pre-drinkers. The opposite effect was observed in countries with high price ratios.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Pre-drinking appears to be a worldwide phenomenon. The significant effects of all three indicators demonstrate the role of country-level determinants underpinning the prevalence of pre-drinking across countries. Policy makers could use the reported findings for initiating campaigns to reduce pre-drinking behaviour.

[Labhart F, Ferris J, Winstock A, Kuntsche E. The country-level effects of drinking, heavy drinking and drink prices on pre-drinking: An international comparison of 25 countries. Drug Alcohol Rev 2017;00:000-000]

Published in Pregnant Women

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: This study tested the measurement invariance of the Drinking Motives Questionnaire-Revised Short Form (DMQ-R-SF) in undergraduates across 10 countries. We expected the four-factor structure to hold across countries, and for social motives to emerge as the most commonly endorsed motive, followed by enhancement, coping and conformity motives. We also compared individualistic and collectivistic countries to examine potential differences in the endorsement of drinking motives when countries were divided according to this broad cultural value.

DESIGN AND METHODS: A sample of 8478 undergraduate drinkers from collectivistic (Portugal, Mexico, Brazil, Spain; n = 1567) and individualistic (Switzerland, Hungary, Canada, the Netherlands, the UK and Ireland, and the USA; n = 6911) countries completed the DMQ-R-SF. Countries were classified as individualistic or collectivistic based on world-wide norms.

RESULTS: Using multigroup confirmatory factor analysis, the 4-factor model of the DMQ-R-SF showed configural and metric invariance across all 10 countries. As predicted, the rank order of undergraduates' drinking motive endorsement was identical across countries (social > enhancement > coping > conformity), although a mixed model analysis of variance revealed a significant interaction where undergraduates from individualistic countries more strongly endorsed social and enhancement motives relative to undergraduates from collectivistic countries.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: There was broad cross-cultural consistency in the factor structure and mean patterns of drinking motives. Undergraduate students appear to drink mainly for positive reinforcement (i.e. for social and enhancement reasons), although this tendency is particularly pronounced among those from more individualistic countries.

[Mackinnon SP, Couture M-E, Cooper ML, Kuntsche E, O'Connor RM, Stewart SH, and the DRINC Team. Cross-cultural comparisons of drinking motives in 10 countries: Data from the DRINC project. Drug Alcohol Rev 2017;00:000-000]

Published in Drinking Patterns

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: It is unknown if wine, beer and spirit intake lead to a similar association with diabetes. We studied the association between alcoholic beverage preference and type 2 diabetes incidence in persons who reported to consume alcohol.

SUBJECTS/METHODS: Ten European cohort studies from the Consortium on Health and Ageing: Network of Cohorts in Europe and the United States were included, comprising participant data of 62 458 adults who reported alcohol consumption at baseline. Diabetes incidence was based on documented and/or self-reported diagnosis during follow-up. Preference was defined when 70% of total alcohol consumed was either beer, wine or spirits. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were computed using Cox proportional hazard regression. Single-cohort HRs were pooled by random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS: Beer, wine or spirit preference was not related to diabetes risk compared with having no preference. The pooled HRs were HR 1.06 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93, 1.20) for beer, HR 0.99 (95% CI 0.88, 1.11) for wine, and HR 1.19 (95% CI 0.97, 1.46) for spirit preference. Absolute wine intake, adjusted for total alcohol, was associated with a lower diabetes risk: pooled HR per 6 g/day was 0.96 (95% CI 0.93, 0.99). A spirit preference was related to a higher diabetes risk in those with a higher body mass index, in men and women separately, but not after excluding persons with prevalent diseases.

CONCLUSIONS: This large individual-level meta-analysis among persons who reported alcohol consumption revealed that the preference for beer, wine, and spirits was similarly associated with diabetes incidence compared with having no preference.

European Journal of Clinical Nutrition advance online publication, 22 February 2017; doi:10.1038/ejcn.2017.4

Published in Diabetes
Page 1 of 6

Disclaimer

The authors have taken reasonable care in ensuring the accuracy of the information herein at the time of publication and are not responsible for any errors or omissions. Read more on our disclaimer.