Full Text PA-92-101 RESEARCH ON ECONOMIC AND SOCIOECONOMIC ASPECTS OF ALCOHOL ABUSE NIH GUIDE, Volume 21, Number 30, August 21, 1992 P.T. 34 Keywords: Alcohol/Alcoholism Health Care Economics Epidemiology PA NUMBER: PA-92-101 National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism PURPOSE Alcohol abuse and alcoholism are major problems in the United States, and costs related to alcohol misuse are a significant economic issue. The purpose of this Program Announcement (PA) is to make clear the continued interest of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) in supporting additional, high-quality research on economic and socioeconomic aspects of the prevention, treatment, and epidemiology of alcohol-related problems. Alcohol is directly and indirectly responsible for approximately 100,000 deaths annually in the U.S. A significant proportion of alcohol-related deaths are due to traffic fatalities. About one-half of the approximately 6,000 vehicle crash fatalities in 1987 involved alcohol (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 1988). Deaths from cirrhosis and other diseases of the liver account for another substantial proportion of alcohol-related deaths. Alcohol-related cirrhosis constitutes the ninth largest cause of death among Americans and kills more than 10,000 persons annually. Alcohol use is also implicated in homicide, suicide, and death from non vehicular injuries. Morbidity related to alcohol use is also widespread and costly. Heavy drinking is a direct cause of psychiatric, neurological, nutritional, and cardiac diseases. In addition, alcohol use is a contributing factor in pneumonia, diabetes, hypertension, and several types of cancer. More than 1.4 million persons were treated for alcohol abuse and dependence during fiscal year 1987 (DHHS, 1990(b)). In 1990, an estimated 15 million adult Americans had either alcohol dependence or alcohol abuse according to DSM-III criteria (Williams et al., 1989). The costs associated with these conditions are substantial. In 1985, the total economic costs associated with alcohol abuse were estimated at more than $70.3 billion. This included lost work days and earnings of $27.4 billion and nearly $24 billion in productivity foregone as a result of premature alcohol-related mortality (Rice et al., 1990). Many of the research topics of interest to economists are germane to research on alcohol abuse and alcoholism. These include the factors influencing supply and demand, the financing and reimbursement mechanisms for prevention and treatment services, the costs of illness, and the cost effectiveness of alternative prevention and treatment programs. In these areas, the methodologies and analytic techniques familiar to economists may be applied to the study of alcohol-related topics. Although this PA emphasizes research opportunities in prevention and treatment, NIAAA would also welcome economic studies that bear on epidemiologic issues. For example, investigators could examine relationships between variations in economic conditions and rates of alcohol use and abuse. Indicators of economic conditions could include rates of employment and unemployment, income levels and earnings, the proportion of women in the labor force, and other appropriate measures. Indicators of alcohol consumption and problems can be derived from national surveys and morbidity and mortality record systems. Relevant data bases maintained by the NIAAA are described in Appendix I of this PA. This PA is a revised version of a 1988 announcement titled "Research on Economic and Socioeconomic Issues in the Prevention, Treatment, and Epidemiology of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism." HEALTHY PEOPLE 2000 The Public Health Service (PHS) is committed to achieving the health promotion and disease prevention objectives of "Healthy People 2000," a PHS-led national activity for setting priority areas (DHHS, 1990(a)). This PA, Research on Economic and Socioeconomic Aspects of Alcohol Abuse, is related to the priority areas of decreasing morbidity and mortality that are associated with the drinking of alcohol. Prevention strategies that may have a potential to contribute toward such reductions include: interventions that reduce the incidence and prevalence of alcohol abuse among adolescents; interventions that reduce motor vehicle crashes and fatalities associated with alcohol use; interventions involving the use of administrative driver's license suspensions or similar penalties for DWI offenders; and interventions involving statutory restrictions on alcoholic beverage promotions targeted at youth. Potential applicants may obtain a copy of "Healthy People 2000" (Full Report: Stock No. 017-001-00474-0 or Summary Report: Stock No. 017-001-00473-1) through the Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402-9325 (telephone: 202-783-3238). ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS Applications may be submitted by domestic and foreign non-profit and for-profit organizations, public and private, such as universities, colleges, hospitals, laboratories, units of State and local governments, and eligible agencies of the Federal Government. Women and minority investigators are encouraged to apply. Foreign institutions are not eligible to apply for the First Independent Research Support and Transition (FIRST) award. MECHANISMS OF SUPPORT Research support may be requested through applications for a research grant (R01), Small Grant (R03), or FIRST Award (R29). Specialized announcements for the FIRST Award program (R29) and the Small Grant program (R03) are available from the National Clearinghouse for Alcohol and Drug Information, P.O. Box 2345, Rockville, MD 20852, telephone (301) 468-2600 or 1-800-729-6686. Applicants for research grants may request support for up to five years, Small Grants are limited to two years, and FIRST Award applicants must request five years of support. FIRST and Small Grants are not renewable, but applications may be submitted for R01 support to continue research on the same topics. Annual awards will be made, subject to continued availability of funds and progress achieved. Terms and Conditions of Support Grant funds may be used for expenses clearly related and necessary to conduct research projects, including direct costs that can be specifically identified with the project and allowable indirect costs of the institution. Funds may not be used to establish, add a component to, or operate a treatment, rehabilitation, or prevention/intervention service program. Support for research-related treatment, rehabilitation, or prevention services and programs may be requested only for costs required by the research. These costs must be justified in terms of research objectives, methods, and designs that promise to yield generalizable knowledge and/or make a significant contribution to theoretical concepts. Grants must be administered in accordance with the PHS Grants Policy Statement (Rev. October 1990). FUNDS AVAILABLE No specific set-aside funds are being allocated by the NIAAA for this program at this time. Applications received in response to this PA will compete with others assigned to the NIAAA for funding. The amount of funding available will depend on appropriated funds, quality of research applications, and program priorities at the time of the award. In FY 1992, 29 grants relating to this program area, including new and continuation grants, were funded for approximately $6 million. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES Economic considerations often have a strong direct or indirect effect on the levels of alcohol consumption and on the levels of alcohol-related problems. The price and availability of alcoholic beverages, for example, have been shown to affect alcohol consumption, morbidity, and mortality. Advertising by the alcohol industry supports a significant share of prime-time television, but the effects of advertising on alcohol use and abuse still are not clear. Public information campaigns, alone or in combination with more personalized approaches, may be used to prevent alcohol problems, but the cost-effectiveness of such intervention strategies should be more firmly established. Risk-taking behavior may be conceptualized in economic terms according to rational and quasi-rational models of decision-making. Costs, as well as other social policy considerations, affect the choice of strategies for deterring drinking and driving and the ways such interventions are implemented. These themes are further elaborated below. In addressing these issues, prospective researchers are strongly urged to draw upon the expertise of economists and other scientists experienced in research on the prevention of alcohol problems. This may supplement the applicants' own expertise. A. Price and Availability Previous Studies The price and availability of alcoholic beverages appear to be related to levels of alcohol consumption and alcohol related problems. Specifically, research indicates that variations in alcoholic beverage prices are related to per capita alcohol consumption (Atkinson, Gomulka, and Stern, 1990; Coate and Grossman, 1988; Grossman, Coate, and Arluck, 1987; Heien and Pompelli, 1989; Ornstein and Levy, 1983; Ornstein and Hanssens, 1985; Nelson, 1990), traffic crashes and fatalities (Phelps, 1988; Cook, 1981; Saffer and Grossman, 1987(a); Saffer and Grossman, 1987(b)), and cirrhosis mortality rates (Cook, 1981; Cook and Tauchen, 1982). Moreover, constraints on the availability of alcoholic beverages have been statistically associated with lower consumption and problem levels (Glicksman and Rush, 1986; Room, 1984; Rush, Glicksman and Brook, 1986; Ornstein and Hanssens, 1985). Conceptually, price and availability are related phenomena. From an economic perspective, restrictions on availability may be interpreted as increases in the "full price" paid by the buyer (Grossman, 1988). This full price includes the effort and resources expended in purchasing alcohol, in addition to the money price. Social scientists operating from other perspectives have sometimes conceptualized the economic availability of alcohol as one of several dimensions of availability. For example, Smart has distinguished economic availability from physical availability, which he defines as "specific alcohol-control measures employed except for price;" subjective availability, which he defines as "individual differences in how accessible people feel alcohol is to them;" and social availability, which he defines as "availability within small social or family groups" (Smart, 1980, p. 124). Though economists and other social scientists may disagree on how the components of availability should be defined or how they are related, both seem to share a recognition that price and non-price factors are closely related. Taxation is the principal policy mechanism for influencing the price of alcoholic beverages. Taxes on alcohol appeared early in this Nation's history and have always been an important source of revenue. Conceptual approaches to setting the proper level of alcohol taxes have centered on various arguments including: that heavy drinkers should pay for the external costs (see footnote 1 below) of excessive consumption (user fee), that tax levels should be set so as to reduce the level of alcohol-related problems (public health promotion), that tax rates may send inappropriate price signals if the price is less than the marginal social cost of consumption (economic efficiency), that taxes should be adjusted to some historical standard so as to compensate for the effects of inflation (historical precedent), and that taxes across beverage categories should be uniform per unit of ethanol (beverage equality) (Cook, 1988; Cordes et al., 1990; Manning et al., 1989; Pogue and Sgontz, 1989; DHHS, 1989). A consideration in setting tax policy for any one beverage is the degree of beverage substitution that might be expected (Heien and Pompelli, 1989; Ornstein and Levy, 1983). Therefore, the cross-price elasticities (see footnote 2 below) for alcoholic beverages are important considerations in establishing tax policy. Also important is the potential substitution of illegal drugs (such as marijuana) for alcohol if alcohol taxes are increased substantially. Whether or not various subgroups within the population have different price elasticities for the purchase of alcoholic beverages should also be understood. Such knowledge is important for evaluating the economic efficiency and efficacy of alternative tax policies. Heavier drinkers might not exhibit the same price responsiveness as lighter drinkers. This is a fundamental consideration in arguments about the economic efficiency of a given alcohol tax proposal (Pogue and Sgontz, 1989; Cook and Tauchen, 1982). To the extent that alcohol problems are not evenly distributed through the population, but instead tend to be concentrated among certain groups (such as the concentration of DUI casualties among young men), differences in price elasticity by age, gender, or other demographic characteristics may have important implications for the efficacy of taxes in reducing certain problems. Research on availability has kept pace with research on price. Availability restrictions may be aimed either at reducing alcohol consumption or at confining that consumption to drinking contexts and environments thought to be relatively less problems prone. Footnote 1. Costs imposed on third parties other than the buyer and seller, such as the damages sustained by non drinking accident victims or the health care costs borne by the taxpayers. Footnote 2. The proportion by which consumption of one commodity changes in response to a 1-percent increase in the price of another commodity, other things remaining constant. For example, an increase in beer consumption that might occur if the price of wine were raised. The range of availability restrictions that could be studied include such approaches as: total prohibition of sales by local option (Dull and Giacopassi, 1988); restriction of sales to State-run outlets (Colon, 1982; Holder and Wagenaar, 1991; Mulford and Fitzgerald, 1988; Ornstein and Hanssens, 1985; Wagenaar and Holder, 1991; Fitzgerald and Mulford, 1992; Nelson, 1990; Zardkoohi and Sheer, 1984; Smith, 1982; Swidler; 1986); restrictions on the sale of liquor by the drink (Blose and Holder, 1987(a); Blose and Holder, 1987(b); Holder and Blose, 1987); restrictions on days and hours of sale (Smart and Adlaf, 1986; Smith, 1987; Smith, 1988); restrictions on alcohol sales in combination with other business activities (such as alcohol sales at gas stations) (Wagenaar and Farrell, 1989); limitations on the density of alcohol outlets in a geographic area (Glicksman and Rush, 1986; Rush et al., 1986; Colon, 1982; Godfrey, 1988); and planning and zoning restrictions that govern the proximity of alcohol outlets to schools, churches, residences, and other types of land-use (Wittman and Hilton, 1987). Youth are a sub-population of particular interest with regard to alcohol availability. Recent research has concentrated on the advisability of raising the minimum drinking age (GAO, 1987; Wagenaar, 1986). Much less is known about the patterns and mechanisms of youth access to alcohol, and how these patterns might suggest improvements in the enforcement of minimum age laws. Availability issues are also of substantial interest in minority communities. Low-income, inner-city neighborhoods often have relatively high densities of alcohol outlets, which may contribute to the levels of alcohol-related problems in these communities (Kerbs, 1991). Research Needs NIAAA encourages studies that are likely to advance current knowledge in the areas outlined above. Central to this purpose would be studies of the effects of price increases and availability controls on rates of alcohol consumption and alcohol-related problems. Other studies might address such topics as: variations in price and income elasticities among demographic subgroups (especially youth and minorities) and among different types of drinkers (heavy, moderate, and light), beverage substitution effects (including the substitution of cheaper for more expensive brands within the same beverage type as well as the substitution across beverage types), and the potential for substitution between alcohol and other drugs. Further research on alcohol taxation is also needed. Theoretical studies might examine issues such as: (a) the appropriate or optimal level of alcohol taxation; (b) the effects of tax policies on industry pricing and marketing behavior; and (c) the implications of alternative tax structures (e.g., ad valorem vs. per unit taxes, equalization of taxes per unit of ethanol, or state vs. federal taxation) for considerations of efficiency, fairness, and public health. Empirical analyses might also address any of these areas, as well as issues such as: (a) the extent to which increased taxation of alcoholic beverages leads to reductions in alcohol consumption, heavy drinking, or alcohol problems; (b) the importance of public health considerations among the factors leading to the enactment of particular tax policies; (c) the incidence of potential regressivity of alcohol taxes; and (d) the long-term effects of alcohol taxes on factors such as educational attainment and labor market behavior. Studies of the effectiveness of various availability restrictions (either singly or in combination) would help in understanding their utility as prevention tools. Analysts may wish to take into consideration the possibility that, in addition to the formal existence of any set of restrictions, the vigor of enforcement may also be an important factor in reducing alcohol-related problems (Janes and Gruenewald, 1991). With regard to youth, two areas of study seem especially promising. Studies of patterns of youth access to alcohol could contribute to better enforcement of the minimum drinking age, lead to a more richly detailed understanding of the cultural mores surrounding youthful drinking, and contribute to the design of improved prevention programs for youth. Another area of promise involves studies of the effects of drinking patterns at younger ages on subsequent educational attainment, labor market participation, and career development. Studies of the behavior underlying alcohol use also have an important role to play. These may include studies of the consumption decisions of alcohol-dependent individuals, studies of economic models of addictive behavior, and studies of motivations and cognitions surrounding alcohol use. A methodological priority in economic studies of price and availability is improving the quality and availability of micro data sets that can be used to support economic analyses. Existing survey data sets have been found useful for such analyses to the extent that they contain detailed data on alcohol consumption, household and individual income, and labor force participation (Coate and Grossman, 1988; Grossman et al., 1987; Heien and Pompelli, 1989; Manning et al., 1989). The survey data sets used most often have been the panel component of the Monitoring the Future study, the Epidemiologic Catchment Area Study, the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, the National Household Interview Survey, and the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth. The identification and utilization of additional data sets that could support such analyses would be of value to the field. To date, most price and availability studies using micro data have been secondary analyses. Applicants are encouraged to consider moving beyond this stage by proposing to conduct surveys that are explicitly designed to support economic analyses. This would yield data sets with variables more closely tailored to the needs of such analyses. For example, the simple family income items present in many surveys could be superseded by a more detailed set of items that identify the respondent's income, the amount of income that comes from wages and salaries, and the amount of income that is received as transfer payments. Applicants are encouraged to consider the formation of research teams that include both individuals with expertise in survey research and individuals with expertise in economic analysis. On the price side, recent studies have tended to use data provided by the American Chamber of Commerce Research Association (American Chamber of Commerce Researchers Association, 1991; Nelson, 1990) or Federal excise tax data (taken as a proxy for price). Other price data have been drawn from liquor industry sources (DISCUS and Jobson's Liquor Handbook). Research that identifies and utilizes additional sources of price data would be of great value to the field. B. Advertising and Mass Media Previous Studies A variety of social science methodologies, including those traditionally employed by economists, may be used to evaluate the effects of mass communications in either promoting or preventing alcohol consumption and in increasing or reducing the problems associated with it. Alcohol advertisements encourage a favorable view of alcohol consumption (Finn and Strickland, 1982; Atkin, 1987; Atkin, 1990; Postman et al., 1987). A supportive view of drinking is also embedded in broadcast media programming (Wallack, Grube, Madden, and Breed, 1990; Hansen, 1988; Kilbourne, 1985). To the extent that supportive presentations lead to positive attitudes and to distorted perceptions of the uses and abuses of alcohol, advertising messages that contain such supportive presentations would be expected to lead to increased consumption. These media effects are most likely to alter or shape the beliefs and intentions of those youthful viewers who have had the greatest exposure to alcohol advertisements. Most studies to date, however, provide only modest support for this hypothesis (Smart, 1988). Other studies using econometric and time series analyses of aggregate data to explore a link between advertising and per capita consumption and to assess the effects of advertising bans have found weak and inconsistent advertising effects (Smart, 1988; Saffer, 1991; Makowsky and Whitehead, 1991). The mass media also have been used to convey information about the health hazards associated with alcohol consumption through news articles, public service messages and, more recently, by "cooperative collaboration" between TV producers and health promotion experts in encouraging alternative depictions of alcohol use and consequences. The goals of these health promotion efforts have been to increase public knowledge and, ultimately, to reduce alcohol-related problems. Research on mass media messages, in general, suggests that they are most likely to be effective when combined with other interventions, such as organized discussion groups, personalized communications, or visible enforcement of deterrent laws. Both the Stanford Heart Study and Project CRASH illustrate the combined efforts of media and community mobilization (Blane, 1988; Holder, 1988). The accumulation of knowledge about the effects of advertising and media programming has been hampered by widely acknowledged flaws in the research designs of many studies, as well as by narrow conceptualizations and data availability limitations. These shortcomings indicate the continued need for methodologically sound, well-executed research that can demonstrate the potential and limits of mass communications that might affect drinking attitudes and behavior. Research Needs Research is needed to determine whether or not there is a clear connection between advertising and mass media portrayals and alcohol use by youthful and vulnerable populations and abuse by others. This might include: o Studies of the impact of advertising on the development of alcohol expectancies and drinking behavior in youth; o Examinations of the relationships between either advertising expenditures or advertising policies and alcohol sales or problem levels; o Analyses of the effects of various marketing activities (e.g., promotional efforts, event and team sponsorships) on the drinking behavior of vulnerable individuals and groups (e.g., underage youth, women, ethnic minorities); o Studies of how the images of alcohol and drinking portrayed in mass media programming are interpreted, how they affect public understanding of alcohol problems, and how they affect public responses to prevention and treatment policies; o Examinations of the relationship between the amount of alcohol advertising in the media and the news coverage of both alcohol and general health concerns; o Studies of the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of both alcohol "counteradvertising," social marketing, and health promotion messages and campaigns are needed. These might address the following issues: o The effectiveness of health promotion efforts to alter programming content regarding the portrayal of alcohol and alcohol-related behavior. For example, what has been the impact on attitudes and behavior related to drinking and/or driving of designated driver initiatives? o What lessons from commercial marketing can be applied by those doing social marketing with respect to alcohol? What are the barriers to effective counteradvertising and health promotion efforts? How might these be more effectively addressed? Health warning labels on containers of alcoholic beverages are another means of communicating potential hazards associated with alcohol consumption (Andrews et al., 1990; Mayer et al., 1991; Mazis et al., 1991). Studies about the design and effectiveness of warning labels are encouraged. These could include: o Studies that monitor the long-term impact of these labels among the population at large and among population groups of interest (such as young male drivers, women of child-bearing age, ethnic minorities, or heavy drinkers); o Time series analyses of traffic crash rates or birth defect rates before and after the appearance of the labels; o Laboratory studies of the effects of different label design features, alternative label texts, additional rotating warning messages, or the rotation of warning messages; o Studies of the interaction of warning labels with other preventive strategies, such as interventions among women of child-bearing age or school-based education programs. Studies that might help inform policy-makers about the potential impact of warning labels placed in alcohol advertisements, statements of alcohol content on malt beverages and wine coolers, and nutritional labeling of alcoholic beverages are also encouraged. Such studies could: o Analyze both the message content and the design of these instruments for conveying information about alcohol and alcohol-related health hazards; o Compare the impact of these messages on different population groups (defined by age, gender, ethnicity, drinking pattern, education, or other relevant characteristics); o Investigate the potential backlash effect that statements of alcohol content might have (viz., the possible unintended effect that some drinkers would use the information provided by beverage content statements to seek out and consume beverages that contain the greatest concentration of alcohol). Such studies might use focus groups, laboratory observations of quasi-naturalistic drinking occasions, controlled experiments, or other methods. C. Risk-Taking Behavior Previous Studies Most healthy adolescents engage in some risk-taking behavior. This is part of the natural exploration, initiative-taking, boundary-setting, and assertion of independence that is necessary for psychological development toward adulthood (Erikson, 1950; Baumrind, 1987; Tonkin, 1987). Some risk taking behaviors, however, contribute relatively little to normal growth or unnecessarily endanger young persons (Lewis and Lewis, 1984; Jonah, 1986; Irwin and Millstein, 1986; Konner, 1987; Dryfoos, 1990; Feldman and Elliot, 1990). It can be argued that alcohol overindulgence constitutes a substantial risk without a sufficient compensating benefit (Tonkin, 1987; Greydanus, 1987). There is evidence to suggest that many youth have not balanced the risks and benefits of alcohol use in ways that are in their best interests (Fischhoff and Quadrel, in press). For the purposes of this announcement, risk-taking behavior is defined as daring to do something that has perceived benefit, but that is actually dangerous, and in which the actor perceives a risk to himself/herself. Acting without an awareness that a risk is involved, acting without any expectation of benefit, or acting impulsively without the calculus of potential harm is not considered to be risk taking behavior. "Risk" means different things to different people, and it may be influenced by a wide variety of factors (Konner, 1987; Tversky and Kahneman, 1981; Slovic et al., 1982; Kahneman and Tversky, 1984). By the age of 10 to 12 and continuing through adolescence, youth enter a period in which they explore, try on new roles, and seek new experiences (Erikson, 1950; Baumrind, 1987; Tonkin, 1987). At this point, generally speaking, the early adolescents do not have the basis that adult maturity provides in cognitive reasoning for evaluating the probabilities of risk (Baumrind, 1987; Irwin and Millstein, 1986; Piaget and Inhelder, 1958). Further, peer pressure may override or distort perception of risks (Lewis and Lewis, 1984). The use of alcohol in certain situations by adolescents or adults may, in itself, be considered risk-taking behavior (Baumrind, 1987; Fischhoff and Quadrel, in press). It may also act as a factor in the decision to enter into other risk-taking behaviors such as driving after drinking, engaging in indiscriminate sex, or experimenting with illegal drugs (Baumrind, 1987; Tonkin, 1987; Jonah, 1986; Irwin and Millstein, 1986; Fischhoff and Quadrel, in press). A better understanding of the reasons for such risk-taking behavior should contribute to more well-grounded prevention efforts. Research Needs NIAAA is interested in laboratory experiments, longitudinal studies, survey studies, observational studies, and field studies that identify the kinds of factors that are involved in risk-taking decisions related to adolescent alcohol use. A few suggested examples of research studies that could be funded under this announcement are as follows: o Studies that develop and test models of risk-taking. These models might take into account such factors as the cognitive assessment of risk, the "myth of invulnerability" (Baumrind, 1987; Tonkin, 1987; Jonah, 1986; Irwin and Millstein, 1986), the limited (real world) experience or maturity of youth at the various developmental levels (Erikson, 1950; Baumrind, 1987; Jonah, 1986; Piaget and Inhelder, 1958), the preference for risk or arousal need (Wilde, 1982), and the probabilities and valences associated with real and perceived benefits and penalties (Tonkin, 1987; Jonah 1986; Konner, 1987; Tversky and Kahneman, 1981; Kahneman and Tversky, 1984; Slovic, 1987). o Studies that identify the forces that stimulate or suppress adolescent risk-taking behavior. These forces might be tested individually or synthesized into multifaceted models to be tested. In this work, cultural differences should be taken into account. The same values and decision-making schemes might not apply across ethnic and socioeconomic subpopulations. o Studies that examine the perception of invulnerability among youth and adults. This would include the identification of factors that increase and reduce this perception. Especially important would be studies of the interplay between perceptions of invulnerability, risk taking, and intentions to drink in potentially dangerous situations. o Studies that identify situations, conditions, and factors that may undermine the exercise of good judgment on the part of youth. Also needed are studies of considerations that would make not drinking a more attractive choice to young people. Where research to date has focused on teaching "refusal skills" and ways to avoid risk, future research could address how youth consider the tradeoffs they might be willing to make regarding alcohol use. o Studies that examine how young people estimate the probabilities of risk associated with alcohol use and how this changes with age. To what extent does risk-taking related to alcohol use decrease with age (the "maturing out" process)? Is it true that older people are more likely than younger people to perceive the potential negative outcomes associated with alcohol use? D. Deterring Drinking and Driving Previous Studies The effectiveness of an effort to deter drinking and driving has been attributed to three factors: the certainty, severity, and swiftness of the sanction (Ross, 1984). Many recent changes in laws, enforcement, and administrative procedures that operate along these principles have been proposed to enhance deterrence. These proposed changes represent natural experiments and provide numerous opportunities for evaluation (Hingson and Howland, 1990). Studies exploring the effects of various policies usually distinguish between general and specific deterrent effects. Specific deterrence refers to the effects of an intervention (usually one considered unpleasant or punitive) on the subsequent behavior or recidivism of the offender. General deterrence includes the inhibiting effects of the threat of the sanction or intervention on the rest of the populace. Among the recent drinking and driving interventions that focus on severity of punishment are increases in minimum fines and heavier jail sentences, particularly for repeat offenders. Efforts to increase the certainty of sanctions include such innovations as police roadblocks. Administrative license revocation is intended to provide punishment that is both more certain and more swift. An indirect approach to deterrence is derived from the civil liability of commercial (and social) servers of alcoholic beverages. This liability varies from State to State, but it has had the general effect of encouraging the hospitality industry to accept such interventions as server training. Recent studies provide evidence that some interventions have been successful in increasing the certainty of punishment for drinking drivers. These include "random" safety checks (Homel, 1986), targeted enforcement (i.e., police patrols focused on times and places where drinking drivers are most common; Ross, 1987), and installation of an ignition interlock system in a convicted driver's car (Morse and Elliott, 1991). Interventions that attempt to make punishment occur more swiftly, such as administrative license actions, have also demonstrated potential deterrent effect (Zador et al., 1988; Nichols and Ross, 1989). However, the effectiveness of brief mandatory jail sentences remains unclear. Nichols and Ross (1989) reviewed studies assessing both the general and the specific deterrent effects of jail sentences. They found that most of the studies reviewed reported no specific deterrent effect of jail sentences on driving while intoxicated (DWI) recidivism; a few, however, reported that brief jail sentences reduced recidivism. Their review of the general deterrent effect of jail concluded that although several studies found mandatory jail sentences deterred alcohol-impaired driving, other policies such as license withdrawal and high fines may be more effective and are less costly than mandatory jail terms. Research on the effectiveness of multicomponent and alternative environmental approaches to deter drinking and driving indicates the preliminary effectiveness of treating drinking and driving as one aspect of a wider behavior pattern of risky driving which can be addressed by a community-wide campaign of intensified enforcement and community education (Hingson et al., 1990). Several studies have shown that server training (an alternative environmental approach) is effective in reducing the amount of alcohol consumed by bar patrons (Saltz, 1987; McKnight, 1991) without measuring their subsequent driving behavior. Studies of youth indicate that teenage drivers and their passengers are at significantly increased risk of injury and death from an alcohol-related crash in comparison with older drivers and passengers (Klitzner, 1988). Assessments of youth drinking and driving countermeasures suggest that those which focus on regulatory or legislative countermeasures have been more effective than educational strategies focused on altering individual knowledge or attitudes (Klitzner, 1988). For example, studies of changes in minimum alcohol purchase age consistently show that increases in the minimum purchase age decrease crash involvement (O'Malley and Wagenaar, 1991; Saffer and Grossman, 1987). Research on other special populations has identified patterns and problems related to drinking and driving that diverge from those of the general population. The age-adjusted rate for motor vehicle fatalities among American Indians and Alaskan Natives is 2.3 times higher than the rate for the general population. Many factors contribute to this higher fatality rate, but patterns of alcohol use are regarded as major contributors (May, 1989). Blacks and Hispanics also appear to be at high risk for alcohol-related driving problems, due largely to involvement in heavy drinking episodes (Howard et al., 1988). Women generally drink less and drive less than men; their rates of alcohol-related driving also are lower. Recent research, however, points to evidence that women, particularly those between 18 and 24, are drinking and driving more frequently than in the past. Consequently, while rates of DWI arrests and alcohol-related fatal injuries declined dramatically between 1976 and 1985 for young male drivers, those of women between 21 and 24 increased substantially (Popkin, 1991). Such findings suggest the need for greater attention to the drinking and driving behavior of these special populations. Research Needs A variety of applications for research on the costs and benefits of deterrence-based drinking and driving interventions are encouraged. For example, research is needed to determine which types of sanctions, in which combinations, and at which levels of severity produce the greatest amounts of both general and specific deterrent effects. This research would address questions such as the following: What is the optimum period for license withdrawal in terms of preventing future drinking and driving among those punished? How effective are fines based on the offender's income level? What is the minimum level of driver safety checks needed in order to produce lasting reductions in the fatal crash rate? How can the short-term effectiveness of media campaigns be sustained over time? How do (a) server training, (b) designated driver campaigns, (c) provision of alternative means of transportation, and (d) other prevention activities initiated by some segments of the alcohol service industry compare with respect to cost effectiveness? Also encouraged are studies of how changes in the evolving judicial system shape and influence the kinds of deterrence programs that are initiated. Economic analyses of the costs of deterrence-based interventions are needed to formulate wise public policy. Appropriate political choices depend on knowing the costs associated with various choices. Among the policy options for which such analyses might be appropriate are: expanded police patrols, systematic enforcement of availability limitations, prosecution of drinking and driving cases in court under various legal rules, and the incarceration of DWI offenders. These may be compared to other sanctions such as fines or civil procedures for the forfeiture of cars driven by offenders. Other costs that might be explored are those borne by defendants and their families, such as insurance premium increases, legal fees, and the costs incurred by third parties as a result of uninsured driving by those subjected to license penalties. Cost-benefit comparisons can be made between various deterrence programs to see which are most effective and efficient in reducing drinking and driving (e.g., random safety checks compared with targeted enforcement). In addition, deterrence-based programs might be compared with interventions not explicitly based on the deterrence principle but which have deterrent potential. These include availability constraints (Cook, 1981; Rabow and Watts, 1982), educational programs to help drivers recognize and act on the symptoms of alcohol impairment in themselves and others (Thurman, Jackson and Zhao, 1990; Rabow, et al., 1990), and alcoholism treatment programs for DWI offenders. In comparing program types, attention should be paid to their relative effectiveness and efficiency. The frequency and circumstances under which informal interventions occur (i.e., preventing a friend or acquaintance from driving while intoxicated) also merits consideration. The evidence of various problems and risk patterns among special populations suggests the value of studies focused specifically on racial/ethnic minority, female, and youthful populations. To reduce drinking and driving by youth, research might focus on the etiology of youth drinking as well as testing the effectiveness of programs that separate drinking from driving (e.g., designated driver). Research on other populations needs to (1) determine the full extent of the drinking and driving problem in each group, (2) explore the extent to which differences in DWI arrest rates are the result of differential law enforcement by police, and (3) test the effectiveness of drinking and driving countermeasures tailored to specific subcultures. These might assess public service announcements and health promotion information in Spanish and/or those using celebrities and ethnic symbols to convey an anti-drinking and driving message. Treatment Research Issues Previous Studies Treatment services, health policies, reimbursement and management systems are components in an interdependent, interactive and continuously evolving system of health care. Access to and effectiveness of treatment services for alcoholism and alcohol abuse are shaped by this larger socioeconomic system of health care. Of vital importance to the identification and adoption of appropriate alcohol treatment services is research on the cost effectiveness and cost offsets of alternative treatment modalities in different types of treatment settings and in different patient populations (see, for example, Apsler and Harding, 1991; Blose and Holder, 1991; Goodman et al., 1991; Hayashida et al., 1989; Holder and Blose, 1991; Walsh et al., 1991; Wright and Buck, 1991). Of equal importance will be research on the impact of specific reimbursement systems, managed care systems and/or health policies on the availability and cost effectiveness of different types of alcohol treatment services (Institute of Medicine, 1989; Institute of Medicine, 1990; Strumwasser et al., 1991). Research Needs Research is needed in the following areas: o Descriptive studies of the existing alcoholism treatment system can help enhance current knowledge (Institute of Medicine, 1989; Moos et al., 1990). Such studies would examine the geographic distribution, availability, use, and costs of various alcoholism treatment services and settings. Treatment services to be studied would include common modalities provided by publicly funded programs at the local, state, and federal level as well as privately funded programs. Among the modalities that could benefit from additional research attention is 28-day, AA-based rehabilitation (Cook, 1988). More information is also needed about such questions as: How much care is provided outside the formal alcoholism treatment system; by primary care physicians, for example, or in non-medical settings such as AA (McCrady and Irvine, 1989)? Who uses these services? o There is need for a typology that would characterize treatment services according to the nature and duration of the interventions provided, characteristics of the facility in which they are offered, and other relevant factors such as the type and range of services. Such a typology could provide a basis for descriptive studies comparing the relative costs of various strategies for treatment. o Studies that examine the interrelationships among treatment factors, patient factors, facility characteristics, and treatment costs are also encouraged (Walsh et al., 1991). Studies in this area would use the kinds of data described above to examine differences across geographic areas and across patients with different characteristics according to type of treatment and setting (type of facility and characteristics of the facility, such as inpatient vs. outpatient or hospital-based vs. freestanding). The techniques and approaches of industrial organization economics might also have useful applications to the analysis of the supply of treatment. Studies in this area might ask questions such as: What differences are there in the type and volume of services provided to patients with different characteristics? How do the services provided by free standing facilities differ from those provided in hospital based programs? How does the financing of these services (e.g., public vs. private) vary across patients and across areas? o Studies that focus on the need for alcoholism treatment services and on determinants of use of or access to these services would also be of interest. Existing research suggests that the need for alcoholism services in the population is far greater than might be assumed on the basis of current patterns of use. Only about 15 percent of individuals with diagnosable alcohol problems receive alcoholism treatment services. Research is needed to examine how such factors as severity of alcohol dependence, ability to pay for treatment (both through a third party and out of pocket), treatment cost, treatment duration, and the availability of treatment affect the decision to use alcoholism treatment services and the type of services sought. Some specific questions that might be asked include: Who seeks what kind of treatment? What kinds of individuals seek care in informal as opposed to formal settings, or medical as opposed to non-medical settings. Do different geographic areas have different patterns of treatment? For example, do providers within certain geographic areas tend to use only inpatient care? What are the monetary and the non-monetary factors influencing the willingness to seek treatment, or to seek certain kinds of treatment? For example, do some patients prefer inpatient treatment because it removes them from their environment or provides leave from work? What determines the role of AA in different market areas? Are AA services complements or substitutes for other treatment approaches? Does AA compete with other providers (e.g., are there fewer formal treatment programs in areas where AA is more dominant)? How do geographic or market areas differ in the range and variety of services offered? How does this range affect the treatment actually provided and its costs? If only inpatient treatment is available in an area, for example, utilization patterns and treatment costs may differ from those in areas where a wider range of services are offered. How do employer attitudes toward alcoholism and treatment affect employees' use of alcoholism services? To what extent are mental health services substituted for alcoholism services? For example, how does the availability of mental health vs. alcoholism care affect the use of services by patients with dual diagnoses? o Studies of the "cost offsets" of treating alcoholism are also of importance. Such studies ask whether the costs of alcoholism treatment are offset by reductions in other health care costs (Blose and Holder, 1991; Goodman et al., 1991). Because the costs of treatment are often difficult to determine from available data and the costs of the untreated condition are even more difficult to measure, proxy measures of cost (such as number of physician visits or days of work missed) may be used instead of cost. An important area of study involves the dynamics behind observed cost offsets. For example, why do we observe high medical care costs prior to treatment and low costs afterwards? o NIAAA also encourages studies that examine the variable impact of a treatment intervention's effects on outcome and cost within the context of specific types of health service systems (e.g., general hospitals, psychiatric hospitals, free standing alcoholism treatment units). Such studies could examine the generalizability of treatment effects from interventions demonstrated to be efficacious in controlled clinical trials. Alternatively, cost analyses can be added to clinical trials carried out in health system settings that represent services typically available to the general population. o Studies that explore the costs associated with alternative patient outcomes are encouraged. Competing demands for relatively limited health care resources require scrutiny of the cost effectiveness of the treatment of health care problems, including alcohol-related problems. Unfortunately, there is at present limited information about the direct and indirect costs of alcohol-related problems, and limited knowledge of the clinical outcomes associated with the treatment of these problems. Consequently, studies are encouraged that increase our understanding of the costs associated with alternative patient outcomes (Holder et al., 1991; Cartwright and Kaple, 1991). These studies should control for differences in patient characteristics, clinical variables, treatment setting, modality, provider characteristics, and source of payment. o Studies of the nature and effects of current strategies for financing and reimbursing alcoholism treatment and for containing treatment costs on the organization and delivery of care are also encouraged. Reimbursement strategies contain specific incentives for providers of alcoholism treatment services. Research is needed on how alcoholism treatment services are currently funded and how the incentives contained in current reimbursement and/or managed care systems affect the provision and use of alcoholism treatment services. Studies may assess the potential effects of alternative financing, reimbursement and/or managed care strategies on the organization, cost, delivery, availability, or outcomes of alcoholism treatment. Some specific questions are the following: What are the determinants of insurance coverage? What role do factors like unionization, employee turnover, and employer size play? How does adverse selection operate? How do mandated insurance benefits affect the utilization of alcoholism treatment services, employee assistance programs, etc.? What determines alcoholism benefits in managed care systems? What services are actually provided? How is access to these services managed? In what way and to what extent do managed care systems reduce the amount of treatment provided (e.g., number of inpatient treatment days, number of psychotherapy sessions, or number of types and hours of service provided)? What is the impact of specific types of managed care systems on access to care and on the utilization, cost, and quality of services provided? How do regional patterns of insurance coverage affect the kinds of alcoholism services offered? What determines the relative market shares of public and private providers and for-profit vs. not-for-profit providers? Does provider behavior (e.g., patient mix, costs, profit margins) vary as the market shares vary? What is the distribution of alcoholism treatment costs across individuals, families, third-party payers, employers, etc.? Who bears the burden? Can we explain differences in the States' behavior (e.g., variations in the development of their public programs)? This includes not only State-funded community treatment programs but also State health insurance programs like Medicaid. How does the amount spent on treatment relate to treatment utilization in publicly funded programs? Do states that spend more money provide more treatment? STUDY POPULATIONS SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS ON THE INCLUSION OF MINORITIES AND WOMEN AS SUBJECTS IN RESEARCH Applications for grants and cooperative agreements that involve human subjects are required to include minorities and both genders in study populations so that research findings can be of benefit to all persons at risk of the disease, disorder or condition under study: special emphasis should be placed on the need for inclusion of minorities and women in studies of diseases, disorders, and conditions which disproportionately affect them. This policy applies to all research involving human subjects and human materials, and applies to males and females of all ages. If one gender and/or minorities are excluded or are inadequately represented in this research, particularly in proposed population-based studies, a clear, compelling rationale for exclusion or inadequate representation should be provided. The composition of the proposed study population must be described in terms of gender and racial/ethnic group, together with a rationale for its choice. In addition, gender and racial/ethnic issues should be addressed in developing a research design and sample size appropriate for the scientific objectives of the study. Applicants are urged to assess carefully the feasibility of including the broadest possible representation of minority groups. However, NIH and ADAMHA recognize that it may not be feasible or appropriate in all research projects to include representation of the full array of United States racial/ethnic minority populations (i.e., American Indians or Alaskan Natives, Asians or Pacific Islanders, Blacks, Hispanics). Investigators must provide the rationale for studies on single minority population groups. Applications for support of research involving human subjects must employ a study design with minority and/or gender representation (by age distribution, risk factors, incidence/prevalence, etc.) appropriate to the scientific objectives of the research. It is not an automatic requirement for the study design to provide statistical power to answer the questions posed for men and women and racial/ethnic groups separately; however, whenever there are scientific reasons to anticipate differences between men and women, and racial/ethnic groups, with regard to the hypothesis under investigation, applicants should include an evaluation of these gender and minority group differences in the proposed study. If adequate inclusion of one gender and/or minorities is impossible or inappropriate with respect to the purpose of the research, because of the health of the subjects, or other reasons, or if in the only study population available, there is a disproportionate representation of one gender or minority/majority group, the rationale for the study population must be well explained and justified. The NIH/ADAMHA funding components will not make awards of grants, cooperative agreements or contracts that do not comply with this policy. For research awards which are covered by this policy, awardees will report annually on enrollment of women and men, and on the race and ethnicity of subjects. Protection of Human Subjects The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) has regulations for the protection of human subjects and has developed additional regulations for the protection of children. A copy of these regulations (45 CFR 46, Protection of Human Subjects) and those pertaining specifically to children are available from the Office for Protection from Research Risks, National Institutes of Health, Building 31, Room 5B59, Bethesda, MD 20892, telephone (301) 496-7041. Specific questions concerning protection of human subjects in research may be directed to the staff member listed under INQUIRIES. An applicant organization proposing to conduct nonexempt research involving human subjects must file an Assurance of Compliance with the Office for Protection from Research Risks. As part of this Assurance, which commits the applicant organization to comply with the DHHS regulations, the applicant organization must appoint an institutional review board (IRB), which is required to review and approve all nonexempt research activities involving human subjects. APPLICATION PROCEDURES Applicants are to use the current version of grant application form PHS 398 (rev. 9/91). The number and title of this PA, PA-92-101 "Research on Economic and Socioeconomic Aspects of Alcohol Abuse" must be typed in item number 2a on the face page of the PHS 398 application form. Application kits containing the necessary forms and instructions may be obtained from business offices or offices of sponsored research at most universities, colleges, medical schools, and other major research facilities. If such a source is not available, the following office may be contacted for the necessary application material: National Clearinghouse for Alcohol and Drug Information P.O. Box 2345 Rockville, MD 20852 Telephone: (301) 468-2600 The signed original and five permanent, legible copies of the completed application must be submitted to: Division of Research Grants National Institutes of Health Westwood Building, Room 240 Bethesda, MD 20892** Application Receipt and Review Schedule Applications will be accepted and reviewed according to the following schedule. Receipt Dates Initial Advisory Earliest New/Renewal Review Council Review Start Date Feb 1/Mar 1 *Jun/Jul Sep/Oct Dec 1 Jun 1/Jul 1 *Oct/Nov Jan/Feb Apr 1 Oct 1/Nov 1 *Feb/Mar May/Jun Jul 1 * Competing continuation, supplemental, and revised applications are to be submitted on the latter of these two dates. Applications received after the above receipt dates are subject to assignment to the next review cycle or may be returned to the investigator without review if requested by the applicant. REVIEW CONSIDERATIONS The Division of Research Grants, NIH, serves as a central point for receipt of applications for most discretionary PHS grant programs. Applications received under this PA will be assigned to Initial Review Groups (IRGs) in accordance with established PHS Referral Guidelines. The IRGs, consisting primarily of non-Federal scientific and technical experts, will review the applications for scientific and technical merit. Notification of the review recommendations will be sent to the applicant after the initial review. Applications will receive a second-level review by an appropriate National Advisory Council, whose review may be based on policy considerations as well as scientific merit. Only applications recommended by the Council may be considered for funding. Review Criteria Criteria for scientific/technical merit review of applications for research grants (R01) will include the following: o The overall scientific and technical merit and significance of the proposed research. o The appropriateness and adequacy of the research design, including the adequacy of mechanisms for the implementation of any intervention and the methodology proposed for collection and analysis of data. o The adequacy of the qualifications and relevant research experience of the Principal Investigator and key research personnel. o The availability of adequate facilities, general environment for the conduct of proposed research, other resources, and any collaborative arrangements necessary for the research. o The appropriateness of budget estimates for the proposed research activities. o Where applicable, the adequacy of procedures to protect human subjects. o Conformance of the application to the NIH/ADAMHA policy on inclusion of women and minorities in study populations. The review criteria for Small Grants (R03) and FIRST Awards (R29) are contained in the specialized announcements. AWARD CRITERIA Applications recommended by a National Advisory Council will be considered for funding on the basis of overall scientific and technical merit of the research as determined by peer review, program needs and balance, and availability of funds. INQUIRIES Potential applicants are encouraged to seek preapplication consultation. They may contact any of the following for information on preparing an application under this announcement: Michael Hilton, Ph.D. Prevention Research Branch Division of Clinical and Prevention Research National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 13C-23 Rockville, MD 20857 Telephone: (301) 443-1677 Inquiries relating to fiscal matters are to be directed to: Elsie Fleming Grants Management Branch Office of Planning and Resource Management National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 16-86 Rockville, MD 20857 Telephone: (301) 443-4703 AUTHORITY AND REGULATIONS This program is described in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance, No. 93.273. Awards are made under the authority of Sections 301 and 510 of the Public Health Service Act, as amended (42 USC 241 and 290bb). Federal regulations at 42 CFR Part 52, "Grants for Research Projects," and Title 45 CFR Parts 74 and 92, generic requirements concerning the administration of grants, are applicable to these awards. This program is not subject to the intergovernmental review requirements of Executive Order 12372 or Health Systems Agency review. REFERENCES American Chamber of Commerce Researchers Association: American Chamber of Commerce Researchers Association Cost of Living Index, Third Quarter, 1991. Vol. 24, no. 3. American Chamber of Commerce Researchers Association, Louisville, KY, 1991. Andrews, C., Netermeyer, R., and Durvasula, S.: Believability and attitudes toward alcohol warning label information: The role of persuasive communications theory. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 9:1-15, 1990. Apsler, R., and Harding, W.: Cost-effectiveness analysis of drug abuse treatment: current status and recommendations for future research. In Drug Abuse Services Research Series, No. 1, (DHHS Publication number ADM-91-1777) edited by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, Department of Health and Human Services, Rockville, MD, 1991, pp. 58-81. Atkin, C.: Alcoholic-beverage advertising: Its content and impact. In Control Issues in Alcohol Abuse Prevention: Strategies for States and Communities, edited by Holder, H., JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, 1987, pp. 267-287. Atkin, C.: Effects of televised alcohol messages on teenage drinking patterns. Journal of Adolescent Health Care, 11:10- 24, 1990. Atkinson, A., Gomulka, J., and Stern, S.: Spending on alcohol: Evidence from the family expenditure survey 1970-1983. Economic Journal, 100:808-827, 1990. Baumrind, D.: A developmental perspective on adolescent risk taking in contemporary America. In Adolescent Social Behavior and Health. New Directions for Child Development, No. 37, edited by Irwin, C., Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, 1987. Blane, H.: Research on mass communications and alcohol. Contemporary Drug Problems, 15:7-20, 1988. Blose, J., and Holder, H.: Liquor-by-the-drink and alcohol related traffic crashes: A natural experiment using time series analysis. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 48:52-60, 1987a. Blose, J., and Holder, H.: The public availability of distilled spirits: Structural and reported consumption changes associated with liquor-by-the-drink. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 48:371-379, 1987b. Blose, J., and Holder, H.: The utilization of medical care by treated alcoholics: Longitudinal patterns by age, gender, and type of care. Journal of Substance Abuse, 3:13-27, 1991. Cartwright, W.S., and Kaple, J.M. (eds.): Economic Costs, Cost-Effectiveness, Financing, and Community Based Drug Treatment. NIDA Research Monograph 113. National Institute on Drug Abuse, Rockville, MD, 1991. Coate, D., and Grossman, M.: Effects of alcoholic beverage prices and legal drinking ages on youth alcohol use. Journal of Law and Economics, 31:145-171, 1988. Colon, I.: The influence of state monopoly of alcohol distribution and the frequency of package stores on single motor vehicle traffic fatalities. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 9:325-331, 1982. Cook, C.: The Minnesota model in the management of drug and alcohol dependency: Miracle, method or myth? Part II. Evidence and conclusions. British Journal of Addiction, 83:735-748, 1988. Cook, P.: Increasing the federal excise taxes on alcoholic beverages. Journal of Health Economics, 7:89-91, 1988. Cook, P: The effect of liquor taxes on drinking, cirrhosis and auto accidents. In Alcohol and Public Policy: Beyond the Shadow of Prohibition, edited by Moore, M., and Gerstein, D., National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1981, pp. 255-285. Cook, P., and Tauchen, G.: The effect of liquor taxes on heavy drinking. Bell Journal of Economics, 13:379-390, 1982. Cordes, J., Nicholson, E., and Sammartino, F.: Raising revenue by taxing activities with social costs. National Tax Journal, 43:343-356, 1990. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Inspector General: Youth and Alcohol: A National Survey, Do They Know What They're Drinking? DHHS Publication No. (OEI) 09-91-00653. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1991. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service: Healthy People 2000: National Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Objectives. DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 91-50212. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1990a. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism: Seventh Special Report to the U. S. Congress on Alcohol and Health. DHHS Publication No. (ADM) 28-88-0002. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1990b. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism: Sixth Special Report to the U.S. Congress on Alcohol and Health. DHHS Publication No. (ADM) 87-1519. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1987. Department of Health and Human Services. Public Health Service, Office of the Surgeon General. Surgeon General's Workshop on Drunk Driving, Proceedings. Department of Health and Human Services, Rockville, MD, 1989. Dryfoos, J.G.: Adolescents at Risk: Prevalence and Prevention. Oxford University, New York, NY, 1990. Dull, R., and Giacopassi, D.: Dry, damp, and wet: Correlates and presumed consequences of local alcohol ordinances. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 14:499-514, 1988. Erikson, E.: Childhood and Society. Norton, New York, NY, 1950. Feldman, S., and Elliot, G. (eds.): At the Threshold: The Developing Adolescent. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1990. Finn, T., and Strickland, D.: A content analysis of beverage alcohol advertising, 2. Television Advertising. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 43:964-89, 1982. Fischhoff, B., and Quadrel, M.: Adolescent alcohol decisions. Alcohol Health and Research World, in press. Fitzgerald, J. and Mulford, H.: Consequences of increasing availability: The Iowa experience revisited. British Journal of Addiction, 87:267-274, 1992. General Accounting Office: Drinking-Age Laws: An Evaluation Synthesis of Their Impact on Highway Safety. U.S. General Accounting Office, Washington, DC, 1987. Glicksman, L., and Rush, B.: Alcohol availability, alcohol consumption and alcohol-related damage, II. The role of sociodemographic factors. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 47:11-18, 1986. Godfrey, C.: Licensing and the demand for alcohol. Applied Economics, 20:1541-1558, 1988. Goodman, A., Holder, H., and Nishiura, E.: Alcoholism treatment offset effects: A cost model. Inquiry, 28: 168-178, 1991. Greydanus, D.: Risk-taking behaviors in adolescence. Journal of the American Medical Association, 258:2110, 1987. Grossman, M.: Health economics of prevention of alcohol related problems. Unpublished paper presented to the DHHS, Public Health Service, Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, Rockville, MD, 1988. Grossman, M., Coate, D., and Arluck, G.: Price sensitivity of alcoholic beverages in the United States: Youth alcohol consumption. In Control Issues in Alcohol Abuse Prevention: Strategies for States and Communities, edited by Holder, H., JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, 1987, pp. 169-212. Hayashida, M., Alterman, A., McLellan, A., O'Brien, C., Purtill, J., Volpicelli, J., Raphaelson, A., and Hall, C.: Comparative effectiveness and costs of inpatient and outpatient detoxification of patients with mild-to-moderate alcohol withdrawal syndrome. New England Journal of Medicine, 320:358-365, 1989. Heien, D., and Pompelli, G.: The demand for alcoholic beverages: Economic and demographic effects. Southern Economic Journal, 55:795-770, 1989. Hingson, R., and Howland, J.: Use of laws to deter drunk driving. Alcohol Health and Research World, 14:36-44, 1990. Hingson, R., Howland, J., Schiavone, T., and Damiata, M.: The Massachusetts Saving Lives Program: Six cities widening the focus from drunk driving to speeding and failure to wear safety belts. Journal of Traffic Medicine, 18:123-132, 1990. Holder, H.: A public health model for the prevention and reduction of alcohol problems. Testimony given to the Governmental Affairs Committee, U.S. Senate, June 29, 1988. Holder, H., and Blose, J.: Impact of changes in distilled spirits availability on apparent consumption: A time series analysis of liquor-by-the-drink. British Journal of Addiction, 82:623-631, 1987. Holder, H., and Blose, J.: Typical patterns and cost of alcoholism treatment across a variety of populations and providers. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 15:190-195, 1991. Holder, H., Longabaugh, R., Miller, W.R., and Rubonis, A.: The cost-effectiveness of treatment for alcoholism: A first approximation. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 6: 517-540, 1991. Holder, H., and Wagenaar, A.: Effects of the elimination of a state monopoly on distilled spirits retail sales: A time series analysis of Iowa. British Journal of Addiction, 85:1615-1625, 1991. Homel, R.: Policing the Drinking Drivers: Random Breath Testing and the Process of Deterrence. Federal Office of Road Safety, Canberra, Australia, 1986. Howard, J., Taylor, E., Ross, H., and Ganikos, M.: (1988) Drunk driving among Blacks and Hispanics. In Surgeon General's Workshop on Drunk Driving, Proceedings, Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Office of the Surgeon General, Department of Health and Human Services, Rockville, MD, 1989, pp. 224-233. Institute of Medicine: Aspects of financing, Section V. In Broadening the Base of Treatment for Alcohol Problems, Institute of Medicine, National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1990, pp. 406-484. Institute of Medicine: Prevention and Treatment of Alcohol Problems: Research Opportunities. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1989. Irwin, C., and Millstein, S.: Biopychosocial correlates of risk-taking behaviors during adolescence: Can the physician intervene? Journal of Adolescent Health Care, 7:82S-96S, 1986. Janes, K., and Gruenewald, P.: The role of formal law in alcohol control systems: A comparison among states. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 17:199-214, 1991. Jonah, B.: Accident risk and risk-taking behavior among young drivers. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 18:255-271, 1986. Kahneman, D., and Tversky, A.: Choices, values, and frames. American Psychologist, 39:341-350, 1984. Kerbs, J.: The Association Between Income and Alcohol Availability in Alameda County. Alameda County Department of Alcohol And Drug Programs, Oakland, CA, 1991. Kilbourne, J.: The not-so-hidden persuader. Alcoholism and Addiction, 6:49-52, 1985. Klitzner, M.: Youth impaired driving: Causes and countermeasures. In Surgeon General's Workshop on Drunk Driving, Proceedings, Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Office of the Surgeon General, Department of Health and Human Services, Rockville, MD, 1989, pp. 192-206. Konner, M.: On human nature: Why the reckless survive. The Sciences, 27:2-4, 1987. Lewis, C., and Lewis, M.: Peer pressure and risk-taking behaviors in children. American Journal of Public Health, 74:580-584, 1984. Makowski, C., and Whitehead, P.; Advertising and alcohol sales: A legal impact study. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 52:555-567, 1991. Manning, W., Keller, E., Newhouse, J., Sloss, E., and Wasserman, J.: The taxes of sin: Do smokers and drinkers pay their way? Journal of the American Medical Association, 261:1604-1609, 1989. May, P.: Motor vehicle crashes and alcohol among American Indians and Alaska Natives. In Surgeon General's Workshop on Drunk Driving, Proceedings, Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Office of the Surgeon General, Department of Health and Human Services, Rockville, MD, 1989, pp. 207-223. Mayer, R.N., Smith, K., and Scammon, D.: Evaluating the impact of alcohol warning labels. Advances in Consumer Research, 18:1-9, 1991. Mazis, M.B., Morris, L., and Swasy, J.: An evaluation of the alcohol warning label: Initial survey results. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 10:229-241, 1991. McCrady, B.S., and Irvine, S.: Self-Help Groups. In Handbook of Alcoholism Treatment Approaches, edited by Hester, R.K. and Miller, W.R., Pergamon Press, New York, 1989, pp. 153-169. McKnight, J.: Factors influencing the effectiveness of server-intervention education. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 52:389-397, 1991. Moos, R., Finney, J., and Cronkite, R.: Alcoholism Treatment: Context, Process, and Outcome. Oxford University Press, New York, NY, 1990. Morse, B., and Elliott, D.: Effects of ignition interlock devices on DWI recidivism: Findings from a longitudinal study in Hamilton County, Ohio. Crime and Delinquency, 38:131-157, 1991. Mulford, H., and Fitzgerald, J.: The consequences of increasing off-premise wine outlets in Iowa. British Journal of Addiction, 83:1271-1279, 1988. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, National Center for Statistics and Analysis: Drunk Driving Facts. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, DC, 1988. Nelson, J.: State monopolies and alcoholic beverage consumption. Journal of Regulatory Economics, 2:83-98, 1990. Nichols, J., and Ross, H.: The effectiveness of legal sanctions in dealing with drinking drivers. In Surgeon General's Workshop on Drunk Driving, Proceedings, Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Office of the Surgeon General, Department of Health and Human Services, Rockville, MD, 1989, pp. 93-112. O'Malley, P., and Wagenaar, A.: Effects of minimum drinking age laws on alcohol use, related behaviors and traffic crash involvement among American youth: 1976-1987. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 52:478-491, 1991 Ornstein, S., and Hanssens, D.: Alcohol control laws and the consumption of distilled spirits and beer. Journal of Consumer Research, 12:200-213, 1985. Ornstein, S., and Levy, D.: Price and income elasticities of demand for alcoholic beverages. In Recent Developments in Alcoholism, Vol. 1, edited by Galanter, M. Plenum Press, New York, NY, 1983, pp. 303-345. Phelps, C.: Death and taxes: An opportunity for substitution. Journal of Health Economics, 7:1-24, 1988. Piaget, J., and Inhelder, B.: The Growth of Logical Thinking from Childhood to Adolescence. Basic Books, New York, NY, 1958. Pogue, T., and Sgontz, L.: Taxing to control social costs: The case of alcohol. American Economic Review, 79:235-243, 1989. Popkin, C.: Drinking and driving by young females. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 23:37-44, 1991. Postman, N., Nystrom, C., Strate, L., and Weingartner, C.: Myths, men and beer: Analysis of beer commercials on broadcast television. AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety: Washington, DC, 1987. Rabow, J., Newcomb, M., Monto, M., and Hernandez, A.: Altruism in drunk driving situations: personal and situational factors in intervention. Social Psychology Quarterly, 53:199-213, 1990. Rabow, J., and Watts, R.: Alcohol availability, alcoholic beverage sales, and alcohol-related problems. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 43:767-801, 1982. Rice, D., Kelman, S., Miller, L., and Dunmeyer, S.: The Economic Costs of Alcohol and Drug Abuse and Mental Illness: 1985. Report submitted to the Office of Financing and Coverage Policy of the Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Institute for Health and Aging, San Francisco, CA, 1990. Roizen, J.: Estimating alcohol involvement in serious events. Alcohol and Health Monograph 1: Alcohol Consumption and Related Problems, DHHS Publication No. (ADM) 82-1190, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1982, pp. 179-219. Room, R.: Alcohol control and public health. Annual Review of Public Health, 5:293-317, 1984. Ross, H.: Britain's Christmas crusade against drinking and driving. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 48:476-482, 1987. Ross, H.: Deterring the Drinking Driver: Legal Policy and Social Control. Lexington Books, Lexington, MA, 1984. Ross, H., McCleary, R., and LaFree, G.: Can mandatory jail laws deter drunk driving? The Arizona case. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 81:156-170, 1990. Ross, H., and Voas, R.: The New Philadelphia Story: The effects of severe penalties for drunk driving. AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety: Washington, DC, 1989. Rush, B., Glicksman, L., and Brook, R.: Alcohol availability, alcohol consumption and alcohol-related damage. I. The distribution of consumption model. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 47:1-10, 1986. Saffer, H.: Alcohol advertising bans and alcohol abuse: An international perspective. Journal of Health Economics, 10:65-79, 1991. Saffer, H., and Grossman, M.: Beer taxes, the legal drinking age, and youth motor vehicle fatalities. Journal of Legal Studies, 16:351-374, 1987a. Saffer, H., and Grossman, M.: Drinking age laws and highway mortality rates: Cause and effect. Economic Inquiry, 25:403-417, 1987b. Saltz, R.: The roles of bars and restaurants in preventing alcohol-impaired driving: A evaluation of a server training intervention. Evaluation and Health Professions, 10:5-27, 1987. Slovic, P.: Perception of risk. Science, 236:280, 1987. Slovic, P., and Fischhoff, B.: Targeting risks. Risk Analysis, 2:227-234, 1982. Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., and Lichtenstein, S.: Why study risk perception? Risk Analysis, 2:83-93, 1982. Smart, R.: Availability and the prevention of alcohol related problems. In Normative Approaches to the Prevention of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Research Monograph 3, edited by Harford, T., Parker, D., and Light, L., Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1980, pp. 123-146. Smart R.: Does alcohol advertising affect overall consumption? A review of empirical studies. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 49:314-323, 1988. Smart, R., and Adlaf, E.: Banning happy hours: The impact on drinking and impaired-driving charges in Ontario, Canada. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 47:256-258, 1986. Smith, D.: Effect on traffic accidents of Sunday hotel sales in New South Wales, Australia. Contemporary Drug Problems, 14:279-295, 1987. Smith, D.: Effect on traffic accidents of introducing flexible hotel trading hours in Tasmania, Australia. British Journal of Addiction, 83:219-222, 1988. Smith, J.: An analysis of state regulation governing liquor store licenses. Journal of Law and Economics, 25:301-319, 1982. Strumwasser, I., Paranjpe, N., Udow, M., Share, D., Wisgerhop, M., Ronis, D., Bartzack, C., Saad, A.: Appropriateness of psychiatric and substance abuse hospitalization. Medical Care, 29:AS77-AS90, 1991 Supplement. Swidler, S.: A reexamination of liquor price and consumption differences between public and private ownership states: Comment. Southern Economic Journal 53:259-264, 1986. Thurman, Q., Jackson, S., and Zhou, J.: A factorial survey approach to the study of drunk driving decision-making. Unpublished paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology in Baltimore, MD, 1990. Tonkin, R.: Adolescent risk-taking. Journal of Adolescent Health Care, 8:213-220, 1987. Tversky, A., and Kahneman, D.: The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211:453-458, 1981. Wagenaar, A.: Preventing highway crashes by raising the legal minimum age for drinking: The Michigan experience 6 years later. Journal of Safety Research, 17:101-109, 1986. Wagenaar, A., and Holder, H.: A change from public to private sale of wine: Results from natural experiments in Iowa and West Virginia. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 52:162-173, 1991. Wagenaar, A., and Farrell, S.: Alcohol beverage control policies: Their role in preventing alcohol-impaired driving. In Surgeon General's Workshop on Drunk Driving, Proceedings, Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Office of the Surgeon General, Department of Health and Human Services, Rockville, MD, 1989, pp. 1-14. Wallack, L., Grube, J., Madden, P., and Breed, W.: Portrayals of alcohol on prime-time television. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 51:428-437, 1990. Walsh, D., Hingson, R., Merrigan, D., Levinson, S., Cupples, A., Heeren, T., Coffman, G. Becker, C., Barker, T., Hamilton, S., McGuire, T., and Kelly C.: Randomized trial of treatment options for alcohol-abusing workers. New England Journal of Medicine, 325:775-782, 1991. Wilde, G.: The theory of risk homeostasis: Implications for safety and health. Risk Analysis, 2:209-225, 1982. Williams, G., Stinson, F., Parker, D., Harford, T., and Noble, J.: Epidemiologic bulletin No. 15: Demographic trends, alcohol abuse and alcoholism, 1985-1995. Alcohol Health and Research World, 11:80-83,91, 1987. Williams, G., Grant, B., Harford, T., and Noble, J.: Population projections using DSM-III criteria: Alcohol abuse and dependence, 1990-2000. Alcohol Health and Research World, 13:366-370, 1989. Wittman, F., and Hilton, M.: Uses of planning and zoning ordinances to regulate alcohol outlets in California cities. In Control Issues in Alcohol Abuse Prevention: Strategies for States and Communities, edited by Holder, H., JAI press, Greenwich, CT, 1987, pp. 337-366. Wright, G., and Buck, J.: Medicaid support of alcohol, drug abuse, and mental health services. Health Care Financing Review, 13:117-128, 1991. Zador, P., Lund, A., Fields, M., and Weinberg, K.: Fatal Crash Involvement and Laws Against Alcohol Impaired Driving. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety: Arlington, VA, 1988. Zardkoohi, A., and Sheer, A.: Public versus private liquor retailing: An inquiry into the behavior of the state governments. Southern Economic Journal, 50:1058-1076, 1984. Appendix I INTRODUCTION This appendix lists data sources which may be useful to applicants in designing a study under this announcement. The Alcohol Epidemiologic Data System (AEDS) prepares periodic reports in four major areas: o Liver Cirrhosis Mortality o Trends in Alcohol-Related Fatal Traffic Accidents o Apparent Per Capita Alcohol Consumption o Alcohol-Related Hospital Discharges In the first three areas, data are available at the State level. In addition, alcohol-related data are available in a "Data Reference Manual" series. The publications in this series cover cirrhosis mortality, hospital discharges, and per capita consumption, plus a volume entitled "County Alcohol Problem Indicators, 1979-1985." It provides data on alcohol-related mortality for counties, States, and the United States. AEDS also produces a "Data Catalog" that summarizes the contents of many national-level data sets useful for alcohol research. The catalog and most of these reports are available by writing AEDS, c/o Cygnus Corporation, Suite 1275, 1400 Eye Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005. The U.S. Government's health survey organization, the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), in April 1985, published a valuable analysis of its data resources related to research on alcohol, drug abuse, and mental health problems. Entitled "An Inventory of Alcohol, Drug and Mental Health Data Available from the National Center for Health Statistics," it can be obtained from the National Technical Information Service, document PB 85-226199, or is available in libraries that carry the NCHS Statistical Report Series. It is filed under the subtitle "Programs and Collection Procedures, Series 1, No. 17." Detailed data on fatal traffic accidents are available from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA) Fatal Accident Reporting System. Published reports can be requested from the National Center for Statistics and Analysis, NHTSA, NRD 30, 400 7th Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590. Data tapes are available from DOT Transportation Systems Center, Attention: John F. Mitchell, DTS 32, Kendall Square, Cambridge, MA 02442. Alcoholism treatment data have been collected in census surveys of the treatment system in the National Drug and Alcoholism Treatment Unit Surveys conducted in 1979, 1980, 1982, 1987, 1989, and 1990. Recent summary reports and access to data tapes are available through the Alcohol Epidemiologic Data System (AEDS), mentioned earlier. DESCRIPTION OF MAJOR DATA SETS TO SUPPORT EPIDEMIOLOGICAL RESEARCH Through AEDS, the Division of Biometry and Epidemiology (DBE) has acquired several hundred data sets over the past nine years. Many of these data sets are from small regional or local surveys with limited potential for analysis at the national level. There are, however, a number of national-level data sets that routinely form the core of AEDS' secondary data analysis efforts. These data sets are national surveys of alcohol consumption and abuse, and national mortality and morbidity statistics. They include the: o National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey I o National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey II o National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey I, Epidemiologic Follow-up Study o Hispanic Health and Nutrition Examination Survey o National Health Interview Survey 1983 o National Health Interview Survey 1985 o National Health Interview Survey 1987 o National Health Interview Survey 1988 o National Natality Survey and National Fetal Mortality Survey 1980 o National Maternal and Infant Health Survey 1988 o Multiple Cause of Death, Mortality Detail 1968-1988 o National Mortality Followback Survey 1986 o National Hospital Discharge Survey 1975-1989 o Fatal Accident Reporting System 1975-1989 o (MEDSTAT) With the exception of the Fatal Accident Reporting System (operated by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) and the MEDSTAT data sets (provided by MEDSTAT Systems, Inc.), all of these data sets are operated by the National Center for Health Statistics (often with funding and planning assistance from NIAAA). This section presents a brief narrative description of each data set. Each description discusses the data set's sample, key variables (e.g., demographic variables) and alcohol related variables. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey I (NHANES I) The NHANES I is a nationwide, multistage, stratified probability sample of about 24,000 persons 1-74 years old. Data are weighted to represent the civilian, non institutionalized population of the 48 contiguous States, excluding Indian reservations. Data were collected between April 1971 and October 1975 on the medical history, examination, diet, and laboratory tests of sample persons. Demographic data on age, sex, race, ethnicity, education, occupation, employment status, marital status, income, and language were also collected. The medical exam portion of NHANES I has four questions related to alcohol: o During the last year, have you had at least one drink of beer, wine or liquor? o How often do you drink? (Range goes from daily to 2 or 3 times per year, for those who answered "yes" to question 1 above.) o Which do you most frequently drink (beer, wine, liquor)? o When you do drink (beer/wine/liquor), how much do you usually drink over 24 hours? The 24-hour dietary recall interview codes are for alcohol ingested during a 24-hour period. Also, information on caloric value for each food substance ingested has been included to permit analysis of food calories, alcohol calories, and percentage of alcohol in the diet. While the battery of NHANES I interviews, exams, and tests were administered to persons 1-74 years old, the alcohol consumption data were collected from persons 12-74 years old. Previous researchers suggest merging data from the medical exam and 24-hour dietary recall interview to analyze alcohol consumption. Given the extensive medical and nutritional data provided in NHANES I, this data base appears to be useful in associating alcohol consumption with other nutritional indices and medical characteristics. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey II (NHANES II) The NHANES II is a stratified, multistage, probability sample of the civilian noninstitutionalized U.S. population. Approximately 21,000 people between the ages of 6 months and 74 years were interviewed between 1976 and 1980. As part of the NHANES series, this survey is designed to monitor the nutritional status and medical condition of the U.S. population. Eight separate survey instruments are used to collect data on medical history, diet, medication and vitamin usage, and behavior. Three subgroups of the population are given special consideration in the area of nutritional assessment. These are: preschool children (6 months - 5 years), the aged (60-74 years), and persons whose income was below the 1970 poverty level. Frequency of alcohol consumption and beverage preference are obtained from the Dietary 24-hour Recall and Dietary Frequency form. Only respondents aged 12-74 are asked for this information. National Health and Nutrition Epidemiologic Follow-up Survey (NHEFS) Although NHANES I provided a wealth of information on the prevalence of health conditions and risk factors, the cross sectional nature of the original survey limits its usefulness for studying the effects of clinical, environmental, and behavioral factors and in tracing the natural history of disease. Therefore, the NHEFS was designed to investigate the association between factors measured at baseline and the development of specific health conditions. This is an important consideration in determining the long term health effects of behaviors such as alcohol and tobacco use. Three waves of the NHEFS have been completed to date: In the first wave, conducted from 1982-84, data were collected on all 14,407 subjects that were examined at NHANES I. Detailed data from personal interviews on health, nutrition, exercise and other behaviors were collected in addition to standard demographic variables. The second wave, completed in 1986, collected information by telephone interviews on changes in the health and functional status since the last contact with the older members of the NHEFS cohort. It was restricted to those subjects who were at least 55 years old at NHANES I. Finally, the third wave of the NHEFS was a follow-up of the entire cohort similar to the 1982-84 survey. Data on changes in health status and behavior were obtained primarily through telephone interviews. Alcohol questions were included in each wave of the follow-up and covered the following broad topic areas: o reasons for not drinking; o quantity and frequency of consumption; and o lifetime drinking patterns. All three waves of the NHEFS can be linked to the baseline survey using individual patient identifying numbers. Hispanic Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (HHANES) The HHANES is the first survey in the HANES series targeted specifically at a U.S. minority. Data were collected on approximately 12,000 Mexican-Americans, Cuban-Americans and Puerto Ricans between 1982 and 1984. As part of the HANES series, the purpose of the survey is to monitor the health and nutritional status of the U.S. Hispanic population. The core instrument collects detailed information on medical history, health problems, nutritional status, and laboratory tests, in addition to standard demographics. The Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration sponsored the supplement, which was administered during the medical exam to persons 12 to 74 years of age. The alcohol section is composed of 75 questions designed to elicit information on the quantity, frequency, and volume of consumption, lifetime drinking patterns, self-classification of drinking type, and reasons for not drinking currently. The survey is designed so that alcohol consumption can be correlated with the health and nutrition parameters identified by the core instrument. National Health Interview Survey (NHIS 83) Alcohol/Health Practices Questionnaire This survey is designed to collect information on health status, health habits, disabilities, and contacts with health practitioners. Conducted over several years, the NHIS data provide the largest source of linked records relating general health status of the U.S. population with measures of alcohol consumption. Data were collected in 1983 on approximately 25,000 people age 18 and above. The core instrument contains questions eliciting information on health and behavior practices, doctor services, and dental care. The alcohol supplement is essentially identical to the HHANES supplement. The main differences are that NHIS 83 employs a 2-week reference period for alcohol consumption questions as opposed to HHANES' 4-week period; and NHIS 83 includes a series of questions covering specific alcohol-related problems. National Health Interview Survey (NHIS 85) Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Questionnaire The NHIS 85 continues the focus of previous waves of the NHIS by collecting data on the health and health care visits of Americans. Approximately 33,000 people age 18 and older were interviewed in 1985. As in 1983, alcohol questions are included in a separate questionnaire. The 1985 alcohol questions are not as detailed as those for 1983. However, information on lifetime drinking, quantity and frequency of consumption, reasons for not drinking, and alcohol-related problems is collected. For the first time, questions on the public's awareness of fetal alcohol syndrome are asked on a NHIS instrument. National Health Interview Survey (NHIS 87) Epidemiology Study This survey includes basic information (e.g., health status, health habits, physician visits, and a wealth of demographic information) from the core questionnaire of the NHIS and various cancer risk factors (including alcohol) in the Epidemiology Study. The NHIS 87 Epidemiology study includes questions on acculturation, food frequency consumption items (over 60 food categories, including alcohol) smoking habits, other tobacco use, reproduction and hormone use, family history of cancer, cancer survivorship, occupational exposures, and relationships and social activities. Data were collected on 22,080 respondents aged 18 years and older, with an oversample conducted in Hispanic households. As part of the section on food frequencies, the alcohol questions in the NHIS 87 include separate quantity-frequency items on beer, wine, and liquor. The beverage-specific items ask the number of times in the past year each beverage was consumed, the number of drinks consumed when the respondent drank, and the portion size (small, medium, or large) of the drink(s). A final two questions on alcohol ask: (1) if there was any period in which the respondent drank 5 or more drinks of alcoholic beverage almost every day, and (2) how long the period lasted. National Health Interview Survey (NHIS 88) Alcohol Section Portions of this survey replicate the alcohol questionnaire in the NHIS 83, but the survey is expanded considerably to include questions on the drinking level of each family member, family history of alcoholism or problem drinking, and symptoms of alcohol abuse and alcohol dependency. A randomly selected person 18 years of age or older from each household in the NHIS sample was asked to respond to the alcohol section. The completed number of questionnaires for the alcohol section was 43,809, a response rate of about 87 percent. As with the NHIS 83, the alcohol questions in the NHIS 88 are very detailed, with specific quantity-frequency items on beer, wine and liquor, along with estimates of total alcohol intake. Other drinking behaviors also are examined in detail, including drinking history as represented by any periods of light, moderate, and heavier drinking over the respondent's lifetime. The lifetime and the past-year prevalence of 41 symptoms of alcohol abuse and alcohol dependency are asked of current drinkers; lifetime prevalence of these symptoms is asked of former drinkers. Also, overall consumption of alcohol in the past year is asked of all respondents, except lifetime abstainers. Detailed consumption items are asked of all current drinkers. National Natality Survey and National Fetal Mortality Survey 1980 (NNS/NFMS 1980) These two different surveys utilize the same survey instruments and are designed to enable analyses of high-risk pregnancies. Data were collected in 1980 on: (a) a sample of 9,941 live birth (or fetal death) certificates; (b) a questionnaire mailed to married mothers; and (c) questionnaires mailed to 3 types of medical service providers (as appropriate) -- attendants at delivery, hospital, and radiologic services. Data from these surveys include numerous personal, demographic, health status, health practices, health resources utilization, and infant status variables. The questionnaires mailed to the mother contained the following four alcohol questions: o Did mother drink alcoholic beverages during 12 months before delivery? o Frequency and amount of alcohol consumption before pregnancy? o Frequency and amount of alcohol consumption during pregnancy? o Kinds of alcoholic beverages consumed (in 7 categories of beer, wine, liquor, and combinations). National Maternal and Infant Health Survey (NMIHS) 1988 The 1988 NMIHS is a nationally representative followback survey of mothers, their prenatal care providers, and their hospitals of delivery conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). The main purpose of the survey is to study some of the factors related to poor pregnancy outcomes such as maternal smoking, drinking, and drug use. It is also useful in assessing progress towards achieving maternal and infant health objectives set by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for the year 2000. The sample consisted of 11,000 women who had live births, 4,000 who had late fetal deaths, and 6,000 who had infant deaths. Based on information from certificates of live births, reports of fetal death, and certificates of infant death in 1988, questionnaires were mailed to mothers irrespective of marital status. Prenatal care providers and hospitals of delivery were contacted after being identified by the mother. Then information supplied by mothers, prenatal care providers, and hospitals of delivery was linked with the vital records to expand knowledge of maternal and infant health. This survey includes data on demographic characteristics, personal characteristics, health status, health practices, health resources utilization, other pregnancies and deliveries, and infant status. The questionnaire mailed to the mother contained the following alcohol questions: o Did mother drink any alcoholic beverages during the 12 months before delivery? o Frequency and amount of alcohol consumption before pregnancy? o Frequency and amount of alcohol consumption during pregnancy? o Did mother reduce drinking of alcoholic beverages during pregnancy? o Reason for reducing drinking of alcoholic beverages during pregnancy? A Longitudinal Follow-up (LF) of mothers in the survey was planned to provide information on health and development of low-birth weight babies, child care and safety, maternal health, maternal depression, and plans for adoption and foster care. Data collection for the LF survey started in January 1991. Multiple Cause of Death, Mortality Detail, 1968-1988 These tapes contain vital statistics data for both underlying and multiple causes of death for all deaths occurring during a particular calendar year. The tapes include deaths at any time after live birth; therefore, no fetal deaths have been included. Demographic variables include date of death, age, race, sex, and geographic data. There are specific disease categories under ICD-8 and ICD-9 which are generally believed to be alcohol related (e.g., alcohol dependence syndrome and cirrhosis of the liver). These may be listed for specific records, as underlying or contributing causes of death. National Mortality Followback Survey, 1986 (NMFS) The 1986 NMFS is designed to supplement information obtained from death certificates with information on important characteristics of the decedent that may have affected mortality. These characteristics include patterns of lifetime behavior, health services experience prior to death, socioeconomic status, and many other aspects of life that may affect when and how death occurs. Data are based on a one percent sample of deaths in 1986. The tape consists of records for 18,733 decedents. The records contain data from death certificates, the informant survey questionnaire responses, and the facility abstract record. Starting with the death records as the sampling frame, questionnaires were mailed to the next-of-kin addressing lifestyle and health related variables. Information from health care facilities in which the decedent spent one or more nights during the last year of life was obtained for 12,275 decedents. Alcohol questions include: whether the decedent ever had 12 drinks in his/her lifetime, how often he/she had a drink, and on the days that the decedent drank, how many drinks he/she had. In addition to diagnostic data on cause(s) of death and hospital diagnoses, the informant was asked whether the decedent ever had cirrhosis of the liver at any time in his/her life. National Hospital Discharge Survey (NHDS) 1975-1989 The NHDS collects data from short-stay hospitals throughout the U.S. excluding military, VA, and institutional hospitals. Data are collected from the hospital record face sheets of a random sample of discharges (sample size varies from year to year but is generally around 220,000 discharges). Basic demographic data (e.g., sex, age, marital status, and geographic location) are collected as well as medical diagnoses and operations. Data on four specific alcohol-related diseases, alcohol dependence, alcohol abuse, alcoholic psychoses, and liver cirrhosis are recorded. Other conditions with alcohol mentioned as a contributing factor also can be analyzed. Fatal Accident Reporting System (FARS) 1975-1990 The FARS is an automated system containing data on all fatal traffic accidents occurring each year within the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. To be included, an accident must involve at least one motor vehicle moving on a roadway customarily open to the public, and result in the death of a person (occupant of a vehicle or nonoccupant) within 30 days of the accident. Data concerning fatal traffic accidents are gathered from the State's own source documents and translated appropriately to codes on standard FARS forms. The data sources may include: police accident reports; State vehicle registration files; State driver licensing files; state highway department files; vital statistics documents; death certificates; coroner/medical examiner's reports; hospital medical reports; and emergency medical services reports. Some of the key variables recorded by FARS include age, sex, role in the accident, injury severity, day of the week and time of day of the accident, and the number of vehicles involved. Alcohol involvement in an accident is determined with three variables. They are: o a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) test; o the judgment of the investigating officer; and o whether DWI charges were filed (variable added in 1982). MEDSTAT Systems Data Base 1987-1989 NIAAA has contracted with MEDSTAT Systems, Inc., of Ann Arbor, Michigan, to provide a subset of the MEDSTAT data base, which consists of more than 180 million health care claims for 5.7 million privately insured individuals under the age of 65. To produce the data base, MEDSTAT contracts with more than 60 large U.S. corporations to collect information on their employer-based health insurance programs. Data are collected from over 100 commercial insurance companies, Blue Cross/Blue Shield plans, third party administrators, and self-administered corporations. (The data base is not a statistically determined sample and it, therefore, is not nationally representative.) The subset of the MEDSTAT data base acquired by NIAAA contains approximately 2 million inpatient and outpatient claim records for families in which at least one member had an alcohol- or other drug-related condition or procedure. Over 40 alcohol- and other drug-related conditions and procedures are coded in the data base, including alcoholic psychoses, alcohol dependence syndrome, alcohol abuse, and liver cirrhosis (with and without mention of alcohol). The conditions are recorded on the claim forms with the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Edition, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes. For billing and administrative purposes, the data base also records conditions and procedures using the following three coding systems: (1) Diagnosis Related Groups, (2) Current Procedural Terminology, Fourth Edition, and (3) Health Care Procedure Codes. In addition to the information on alcohol- and other drug related conditions and procedures, the data base also contains variables describing the demographic characteristics of the patients, benefits plans, clinical treatment, and financial arrangements. The initial version of the alcohol- and other drug-related conditions and procedures data tape contains approximately 50,000 inpatient and 2 million outpatient claim records for the years 1987 through 1989. LIMITATIONS OF MAJOR DATA SETS AVAILABLE TO SUPPORT EPIDEMIOLOGICAL RESEARCH It is generally accepted that alcohol contributes significantly to overall morbidity and mortality. What is unclear, however, is its precise contribution to these events. Recent estimates suggest that alcohol may be involved in 15 to 90 percent of all serious events, depending on the category of event (Roizen, 1982). This is an unacceptably broad range with little practical value for surveillance efforts. To arrive at more specific estimates of alcohol involvement in injury, illness, and death, the Division of Biometry and Epidemiology regularly undertakes analyses of a variety of data sets. The most useful of these are the several large national data sets described in the previous section. Analysis of these data sets enables NIAAA to estimate alcohol's contribution to morbidity and mortality. An example is: o There were 7.4 alcohol-related traffic deaths per 100,000 population in 1989. This discussion has not included all data sets that could potentially be of use to researchers, but has focused on data sets that are national in scope and contain alcohol-related data. Other Federal agencies as well as State agencies may have additional data resources that would be of use to researchers.
Return to NIH Guide Main Index
![]() |
Office of Extramural Research (OER) |
![]() |
National Institutes of Health (NIH) 9000 Rockville Pike Bethesda, Maryland 20892 |
![]() |
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) |
![]() |
||||
Note: For help accessing PDF, RTF, MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Audio or Video files, see Help Downloading Files. |