Table 3.

Discriminative validity of the clinical rule predictions for the onset of hazardous alcohol drinking over 12 months in primary care

Risk algorithmsNumber of itemsNC-index (95% CI)Hedges’ g (95% CI)Predicted probabilityaFrequencyb N (%)Sensitivity
Specificity
LR+
LR–
PPV
NPV
Shrinkage factorc
predictAL-10d1022640.886 (0.854 to 0.918)1.694 (1.460 to 1.928)≥2.72%495 (21.86)0.83
0.80
4.15
0.21
0.13
0.99
0.9595
predictAL-17e1722640.886 (0.853 to 0.919)1.729 (1.495 to 1.963)≥2.92%454 (20.05)0.80
0.82
4.44
0.25
0.13
0.99
0.9595
predictAL-7f722640.819 (0.772 to 0.866)1.292 (1.052 to 1.532)≥3.31%539 (23.81)0.71
0.79
3.38
0.37
0.10
0.99
0.8615
Clinical rule predictions excluding the variable sexual abuses in childhood
predictAL-9d922780.880 (0.847 to 0.913)1.658 (1.425 to 1.892)≥3.01%475 (20.85)0.79
0.81
4.16
0.26
0.13
0.99
0.9629
predictAL-16e1622780.883 (0.850 to 0.916)1.697 (1.463 to 1.931)≥2.78%483 (21.20)0.80
0.81
4.21
0.25
0.13
0.99
0.9639
predictAL-6f622780.803 (0.752 to 0.854)1.273 (1.042 to 1.505)≥2.60%668 (29.32)0.70
0.72
2.5
0.42
0.08
0.98
0.8563
Clinical rule predictions including only the AUDIT
AUDIT-C322880.775 (0.721 to 0.830)1.211 (0.980 to 1.442)≥2.34%517 (22.60)0.75
0.68
4.16
0.26
0.07
0.89
0.9819
AUDIT1022880.781 (0.725 to 0.836)1.254 (1.042 to 1.485)≥2.20%525 (22.95)0.75
0.68
4.21
0.25
0.07
0.89
0.9822
  • a Predicted probability of hazardous alcohol drinking at 12 months, cutoff point where Youden’s J statistic (J = Sensitivity + Specificity − 1) was greater: ‘optimal threshold’.

  • b Number of primary care attendees above the optimal threshold.

  • c Copas’ shrinkage factor estimates overfitting of the prediction models (shrinkage = 1 indicates that there is no overestimation).

  • d Including the AUDIT-C (three items).

  • e Including the AUDIT (10 items).

  • f Excluding any AUDIT. AUDIT = Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test. LR+ = positive likelihood ratio. LR− = negative likelihood ratio. PPV = positive predictive value. NPV = negative predictive value.