↓ Skip to main content

The associations between employees’ risky drinking and sociodemographics, and implications for intervention needs

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The associations between employees’ risky drinking and sociodemographics, and implications for intervention needs
Published in
BMC Public Health, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12889-018-5660-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mikkel Magnus Thørrisen, Jens Christoffer Skogen, Randi Wågø Aas

Abstract

Harmful alcohol consumption is a major risk factor for ill-health on an individual level, a global public health challenge, and associated with workplace productivity loss. This study aimed to explore the proportion of risky drinkers in a sample of employees, investigate sociodemographic associations with risky drinking, and examine implications for intervention needs, according to recommendations from the World Health Organization (WHO). In a cross-sectional design, sociodemographic data were collected from Norwegian employees in 14 companies (n = 3571) across sectors and branches. Risky drinking was measured with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT). The threshold for risky drinking was set at ≥8 scores on the AUDIT. Based on WHO guidelines, risky drinkers were divided into three risk categories (moderate risk: scores 8-15, high risk: scores 16-19, and dependence likely risk: scores 20-40). The association between sociodemographic variables and risky drinking were explored with chi square tests for independence and adjusted logistic regression. The risk groups were then examined according to the WHO intervention recommendations. 11.0% of the total sample reported risky drinking. Risky drinking was associated with male gender (OR = 2.97, p < .001), younger age (OR = 1.03, p < .001), low education (OR = 1.17, p < .05), being unmarried (OR = 1.38, p < .05) and not having children (OR = 1.62, p < .05). Risky drinking was most common among males without children (33.5%), males living alone (31.4%) and males aged ≤39 (26.5%). 94.6% of risky drinkers scored within the lowest risk category. Based on WHO guidelines, approximately one out of ten employees need simple advice, targeting risky drinking. In high-risk groups, one out of three employees need interventions. A considerable amount of employees (one to three out of ten), particularly young, unmarried males without children and higher education, may be characterised as risky drinkers. This group may benefit from low-cost interventions, based on recommendations from the WHO guidelines.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 21%
Student > Bachelor 4 14%
Lecturer 1 4%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 11 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 18%
Social Sciences 3 11%
Psychology 3 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Environmental Science 1 4%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 12 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 July 2018.
All research outputs
#1,971,718
of 23,090,520 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#2,178
of 15,053 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,674
of 328,569 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#68
of 312 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,090,520 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,053 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,569 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 312 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.