Critical Analysis of Trends in Binge Drinking in Canada from 1996 to 2013

Posted: August 25th, 2021

Critical Analysis of Trends in Binge Drinking in Canada from 1996 to 2013

Student’s Name

Institutional Affiliation

Critical Analysis of Trends in Binge Drinking in Canada from 1996 to 2013

Introduction of the Article

Trends in Binge Drinking in Canada from 1996 to 2013 by Bulloch, Williams, Lavorato, & Patten is a repeated cross-sectional evaluation of the epidemiological effect of heavy drinking on the Canadian population. Alcohol abuse has contributed significantly to the increasing cases of mortality and morbidity not only in Canada but also across the world. The authors highlighted alcohol as the leading cause of deaths primarily due to injuries and road accidents. Besides, other health-related conditions, such as liver cirrhosis, certain cancers, cardiovascular diseases, and pressing social issues have a direct link with alcohol. This study has used its cross-sectional data files from the formerresults of the National Population Health Surveys of 1996 and 1998.

The study generated its source information by analyzing a series of Canadian population’s cross-sectional national health surveys. In particular, the authors of this article depended exclusively on two files of data from National Population Health Surveys of 1996 and 1998 targeting respondents aged 18 years and over. As indicated in the study, there was a regularrise in the number of binge drinkers from 13.7% in 1996 to 19.7% by 2013 with a 95% confidence interval. Among the heavy drinkers, the percentage of men involved increased from 20.8% to 25.7% in 1996 and 1998 respectively. However, women represented 6.9% of drinkers in 1996 and 13.8% in 2013. These findings suggest that heavy drinking has become a national concern and calls for stable interventional strategies to restore and improve the value of public health in Canada.

Critique of the Article

According to Zaccai (2004), assessing the quality of an epidemiological study is the same as evaluating whether its inferences are worthwhile trusting and using in subsequent studies. In her review, Zaccai (2004) believes that a constant article focuses on appropriate methods, the nature of the population under investigation, and the representativeness of the study sample drawn for analysis. As a result, she adds, researchers must put into consideration the risk of bias and confounding factors of the epidemiological study and how these aspects affect the outcome at every phase of the assessment (Zaccai, 2014). Thus, this paper presents an insightful critique of the article Trends in Binge Drinking in Canada from 1996 to 2013 to establish whether the authors applied the epidemiological approaches to achieve the effectiveness and importance of the study. Some of the critical areas captured include concepts of validity and its threats, design evaluation, and the analysis phase.

Analysis Based on Validity and its Threats

Every step in any research should be undertaken with a purpose of maximizing the validity of the study. In the article Trends in Binge Drinking in Canada from 1996 to 2013, the first threat to its validity is in the selection bias. While it is essential to focus on adulthood when conducting epidemiological and clinical participants, binge drinking begins right from the onset of the adolescence. In Canada, for instance, high school and college students are the most affected group. Mostly, students under this category fall within the age bracket of 13 to 22 years. Therefore, relying on information about adults alone has the danger of obtaining skewed results which might not be helpful, especially when designing strategies to curb alcohol abuse among teenagers. Nevertheless, there are no serious threats associated with the value of information delivered in this study. Bulloch et al. (2016) generated their data from a series of cross-sectional health surveys which had yielded reliable feedback on the trends of impulse drinking in Canada.

Similarly, the omission of data on individuals of 12 -17 years old had a confounding effect on the study findings. Although Canada has a legal age for drinking right from 18 years, exclusion of other teenagers who are perhaps the most endangered group raises confusion. The main reason for conducting an epidemiological study is to establish the cause, progression, effect, and solution to a given condition. In this study, the authors have shown that one-fifth of the Canadian population engages in binge drinking (Bulloch et al., 2016). However, they failed to indicate whether the one-fifth figure is inclusive or exclusive of the teenagers. Thus, while giving recommendations for the possible interventions to be taken by the Canadian public health officials to deal with this menace, the authors are likely to scale out the other segment of the population. As Zaccai (2004) confirms, confounding can lead to overestimation or underestimation of the outcome thereby influencing the management approaches and the associated control policies.

Design and Conduct of Study Evaluation

Researchers can make a choice which study design, population, number and age of participants suit their investigation. For Trends in Binge Drinking in Canada from 1996 to 2013, Bulloch et al. (2016) used cross-sectional surveys to establish the magnitude of binge drinking penetration in the Canadian population and its subsequent health-related outcome. Since the community under investigation dates back to 1996, the cross-sectional survey is an ideal method capable of documenting the co-occurrence of diseases and alcohol as the risk factors (Zaccai, 2004). Besides, liquor has shown a high prevalence globally, meaning it can be less feasible to employ other designs like a cohort study. Unfortunately, this study design is seemingly expensive as it entails the acquisition of data from old bases, which can ultimately result in measurement and information bias.

Although it is crucial for researchers to consider the social-demographic factors when describing their chosen population, Bulloch et al. (2016) have sufficiently captured their intended study group. In an epidemiological analysis, the investigators follow specific clinical and legal guidelines to settle on participants and to design avenues of reporting their findings. A focus on adults prepares the readers for understanding why generalization would matter. It also has the benefit of promoting selection bias to avoid attracting unsuspecting teenagers into alcoholism. Conversely, the mode of choosing participants can affect the quality of the data. Primarily, the authors of this article have depended entirely on previous data to describe the prevailing situation – binge drinking. This strategy could have a confounding impact in the sense that the researchers do not directly understand how the affected Canadian community have dealt with the drinking habit.

Evaluation of the Analysis Phase

Most researches involving epidemiological studies apply formal statistics to analyze results. In Trends in Binge Drinking in Canada from 1996 to 2013, Bulloch et al. (2016) examined each survey using a 95% confidence interval. Furthermore, the article has applied appropriate sample weights. The use of bootstrap variance estimation procedures followed by the random-effects regression has reduced the possibility of missing data to less than 2% (Bulloch et al., 2016). From this study, there is sufficient strength of association linking binge drinking and the detrimental outcomes including death, cross-infection, and other morbidities. However, there is no direct correlation between exposure to alcoholism and the level of impact it has on the users. Importantly, the study managed to investigate the drinking trend successfully in more than one and a half decades using 11 Canadian statistics (Bulloch et al., 2016). Finally, the sample data were consistent due to the repeated questions that eventually determined the rate of alcohol use in Canada.

Conclusion

Epidemiological article analysis is an essential component of the literature review. It helps to establish whether a given study is credible, reliable, and presents quality findings that other researchers can use to examine issues arising from such researches. A sharp critique of an article focuses on three primary areas.The first area is the validity of the source and its threats, which evaluate the extent of bias captured within the report. Secondly, the design and the conduct of the research also matters as it helps in the analysis of the model itself, its relevance to the projected results, and the selection of the sample population. Lastly, in an epidemiological study, scholars must provide information on how their research has addressed the questions, hypotheses, and postulations through clear analytical tools and approaches. 

References

Bulloch, A.G. M., Williams, J. V. A., Lavorato, D. H., & Patten, S. B. (2016). Trends in binge drinking in Canada from 1996 to 2013: A repeated cross-sectional analysis. CMAJ Open, 4(4), E599-E604. Retrieved from www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5173463/

Zaccai, J. H. (2004). How to assess epidemiological studies. Postgraduate Medical Journal, 80, 140-147. Retrieved fromhttps://pmj.bmj.com/content/postgradmedj/80/941/140.full.pdf