Laboratory Tests for Acute Alcohol Consumption: Results of the WHO/ISBRA Study on State and Trait Markers of Alcohol Use and Dependence
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The WHO/ISBRA Study on State and Trait Markers of Alcohol Use and Dependence aimed partly to evaluate the overall performance and cross-national validity of traditional and new biological markers of alcohol use and abuse. This article focused on the sensitivity and specificity of ethanol and methanol concentrations in plasma, and the 5-hydroxytryptophol (5HTOL) to 5-hydroxyindole-3-acetic acid (5HIAA) ratio in urine, as laboratory tests to identify acute alcohol consumption. Comparison was made with self-reported drinking levels. METHODS: Subjects were recruited in Australia, Brazil, Canada, Finland, and Japan. They were interviewed thoroughly about their alcohol consumption habits, by using the standardized WHO/ISBRA Interview Schedule, and were classified into four categories: nondrinkers, light/moderate drinkers, heavy drinkers (> or =210 g ethanol/week for men, and > or =140 g/week for women), or patients who were receiving treatment for alcohol dependence. Ethanol and methanol determinations in plasma were carried out by headspace gas chromatography. Urinary concentrations of 5HTOL and 5HIAA were determined by using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry and high-performance liquid chromatography, respectively. RESULTS: The baseline levels (in nondrinkers) for methanol and the 5HTOL/5HIAA ratio did not differ markedly between the five populations, except for a considerably higher, but probably artifactual, methanol level in the Finnish plasma samples. Moreover, there were no apparent age or sex differences. The urinary 5HTOL/5HIAA ratio was the most, and ethanol the least, sensitive indicator of recent alcohol consumption, and this was true for the different drinking categories as well as for the five study populations. The highest frequency of elevated test results was observed among those classified as heavy drinkers (e.g., 38% were positive for 5HTOL/5HIAA). However, elevated values also were obtained in nondrinkers and in drinking subjects who denied any intake of alcohol within 2 days before the interview and blood/urine sampling, which suggested a low accuracy of self-reports of alcohol consumption in certain individuals. CONCLUSIONS: The present investigation demonstrated that plasma ethanol and methanol and urinary 5HTOL/5HIAA provide useful exclusion markers for any study of biological parameters that are affected by previous acute ethanol intoxication. The major advantage of methanol and 5HTOL/5HIAA over ethanol is that they can detect recent alcohol consumption even several hours after the ethanol is no longer measurable. The results suggest that the cutoff limits to be used for these markers are not dependent on the country or population to be studied.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».