A Review of the Psychometric Properties of the CRAFFT Instrument: 1999-2010
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Alcohol (AUD) and other substance use disorders (SUD) are common among adolescents. The CRAFFT (Car, Relax, Alone, Forget, Friends, Trouble, 1999) was developed as a brief screening instrument for adolescents to measure AUD and SUD. This systematic review examines the psychometric properties of the CRAFFT. METHODS: We performed a systematic review using Cochrane Database for Systematic Reviews, Pubmed/Medline, Embase (1980 to present), PsycInfo, and Google Scholar using the keywords "CRAFFT", "CRAFFT questionnaire", "alcohol misuse", "alcohol abuse", "alcohol dependence" "alcohol", "substance misuse", and "substance abuse" and "substance dependence". RESULTS: We report 11 studies on validity and six studies on reliability. Populations examined were clinic patients including hospital-based clinic patients, primary care patients, emergency room patients, Native-Americans, sexually transmitted diseases clinic patients, substance users, a general population group, and enlisting military concripts. In general, the CRAFFT was found to be a good screening instrument for gradations of alcohol and substance misuse including problem use, abuse, and dependence. At optimal cut-points, sensitivities of the CRAFFT ranged from 0.61 to 1.00, and specificities ranged from 0.33 to 0.97. The CRAFFT showed modest to adequate internal consistency values ranging from 0.65 to 0.86, and high test-retest reliability. CONCLUSION: The CRAFFT has adequate psychometric properties for detecting AUD and SUD in adolescents. However, more studies of the psychometric properties of the CRAFFT need to be carried out to further assess and improve generalizability to other populations. Gender and ethnic differences also require further examination, as do versions that are adapted for different languages and cultures.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it