1. Lucian Agafitei ESTAT Unit F-4
Preparation of EHIS wave 3 Discussion on the list of variables (Annex I): Alcohol consumption
Agenda point 3.2
Lucian Agafitei
ESTAT Unit F-4
13-14 October 2016
2nd meeting of EHIS Task Force

2. 2nd meeting of EHIS Task Force
Outline
Current sub-module (EHIS wave 2): characteristics and content
Difficulties and possible solutions
Conclusions
13-14 October 2016
2nd meeting of EHIS Task Force

3. Current sub-module (EHIS 2): characteristics
New instrument
Designed for measuring the drinking status, drinking pattern and volume of pure alcohol consumed with 5 questions
Plus one question on risky single-occasion drinking
13-14 October 2016
2nd meeting of EHIS Task Force

4. Current sub-module (EHIS 2): content
AL1 
Frequency of consumption of an alcoholic drink of any kind (beer, wine, cider, spirits, cocktails, premixes, liqueurs, homemade alcohol…) in the past 12 months
AL2
Frequency of consumption of an alcoholic drink for Monday — Thursday
AL3
Number of alcoholic (standard) drinks on average on one of the days (Monday to Thursday)
AL4
Frequency of consumption of an alcoholic drink for Friday — Sunday
AL5
Number of alcoholic (standard) drinks on average on one of the days (Friday — Sunday)
AL6
Frequency of risky single-occasion drinking (equivalent of 60 g of pure ethanol or more) during the past 12 months
13-14 October 2016
2nd meeting of EHIS Task Force

5. Possible impact of changing of categories of AL3 and AL5
Current_1
Version_2
Version_3
Version_4
Version_5
Version_6
Version_7
dr.
dr.
dr.
dr.
5. 3 dr.
6. 2 dr.
7. 1 drink
8. 0 drink
1. 6+ dr.
dr.
3. 3 dr.
4. 2 dr.
5. 1 drink
6. 0 drink
dr.
dr.
dr.
4. 3 dr.
5. 2 dr.
6. 1 drink
7. 0 drink
dr.
dr.
3. 2 dr.
4. 1 drink
5. 0 drink
dr.
dr.
Impact on % of hazardous drinkers (dif. in p.p.):
Version 1 x 3, 4, 6: W <-0.4; 0.5>, M < 0.0; 2.7>
Version 1 x 2, 5, 7: W <-5.8; 2.5>, M <-3.8; 9.7>
The real impact of changing the categories is not clear and would need to be tested
Introduction
Test design
Results
- Order: 3, 6, 4
Discussion
13-14 October 2016
2nd meeting of EHIS Task Force

6. Difficulties and possible solutions (1)
Inconsistency in answers between AL1 and AL2 and AL4 (frequency variables)
Possible occurrence of inconsistencies as AL2 and AL4 being more specific than AL1 and referring to a smaller and closer time frame to recall occurrences (particularly true for irregular drinkers or those who have lately changed their habits).
Too many modalities, some of them with reduced prevalence (AL3, AL5). Possible solution: simplify/reduce modalities.
Better accuracy achieved for the volume of consumption with the current categories. Possible solution: open question on quantities but reporting to Eurostat with due categories.
Sensitive topic for respondents.
Possible solution: asking also about drinking non-alcoholic drinks
Not an issue in all countries or in all respondents. Inclusion of additional questions always permitted.
13-14 October 2016
2nd meeting of EHIS Task Force

7. Difficulties and possible solutions (2)
AL1, AL6 complicated for final interpretation of results at national level. Possible solution: simplification of the answer categories.
Cutting down response categories and replacing them by ‘vague quantifiers’ only gives an illusion of simplification, but new problems emerge. Almost the same response categories for these two questions used by DG-SANTE’s SMART / RARHA questionnaire;
Need to provide respondents with further clarifications of the concepts used, mainly ‘one drink’, especially for CATI. No of alcoholic drinks not easy to convert into standard drinks.
This requires using a beverage-specific quantity-frequency (BSQF) questionnaire, where the drinker reports the brand/type and container size of the different types of alcoholic beverages.
13-14 October 2016
2nd meeting of EHIS Task Force

8. Difficulties and possible solutions (3)
Difficult for respondents to divide between week and weekend days. Drinking patterns may differ between countries. Possible solution: no difference between week and weekend days.
In most cultures, people drink relatively less on working days and more on weekends. Not distinguishing WE from WD resumes asking people to average their consumption over a week.
AL3, AL5: Difficult for respondents to report average number of drinks.
Possible solution: reporting only the total no of units of alcohol drunk and not making an average per drinking day.
No of units asks for more precise calculations, taking each day into consideration. The average allows an approximate plausible answer.
13-14 October 2016
2nd meeting of EHIS Task Force

9. Difficulties and possible solutions (4)
AL3-AL5: Difficulty of answering with the no of ’drinks’. Possible solution: asking the amount of alcohol per specified alcoholic drink categories and then calculate the no of drinks afterwards.
It’s possible but it adds complexity to the questionnaire (question must be asked for each beverage type consumed) and data management.
Proposal for adding a question on drinking with/without meals
Ok for discussion if a rationale, conceptual definition and question wording are provided.
13-14 October 2016
2nd meeting of EHIS Task Force

10. Conclusions and proposals for discussion
For EHIS wave 3:
Keep the current (EHIS wave 2) sub-module unchanged
Focus on facilitating the implementation (improvement of guidelines as regards different data collections modes)
13-14 October 2016
2nd meeting of EHIS Task Force