Original article
Relative performance of the mast, vast, and cage versus DSM-III-R criteria for alcohol dependence

https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(93)90020-2Get rights and content

Abstract

A number of instruments have been developed to screen for alcoholism. With the advent of DSM-III and lay administered psychiatric diagnostic instruments, a test of the performance of these screens relative to diagnostic instruments is critical. In this paper, we document the relative effectiveness in a general medical clinic of the Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test (MAST), the Veterans Alcoholism Screening Test (VAST), and the CAGE questions in comparison to the DSM-III-R criteria for alcohol dependence as measured in the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI). All of the screens performed at acceptable levels, but the MAST and VAST tended to have higher performance characteristics. At the recommended cut points, they had higher sensitivity for lifetime alcohol dependence (VAST 95.1 %, MAST 90.2%, CAGE 78.0%) as well as higher specificity (VAST 80.3%, MAST 81.7%, CAGE 76.1%). For present alcohol dependence only, at the recommended cut points the MAST and CAGE had sensitivity of 100% but specificity of 62.0 and 61.0% respectively. The VAST had sensitivity of 83.3% and specificity of 89.0%. We conclude that all three perform well relative to DSM-III-R criteria.

References (28)

  • B.F. Grant et al.

    Screening for current drug use disorders in alcoholics: an application of receiver operator characteristic analysis

    Drug Alcohol Dependence

    (1988)
  • M.L. Selzer

    Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test: the quest for a new diagnostic instrument

    Am J Psychiatry

    (1971)
  • A.D. Pokorny et al.

    The brief MAST: a shortened version of the Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test

    Am J Psychiatry

    (1972)
  • W.M. Swenson et al.

    The use of a self-administered alcoholism screening test (SAAST) in a medical center

  • J.A. Ewing et al.

    Identifying the “hidden alcoholic”

  • K. Magruder-Habib et al.

    Validation of the Veterans Alcoholism Screening Test

    J Stud Alcohol

    (1982)
  • J.M. Murphy et al.

    Performance of screening and diagnostic tests: application of receiver operating characteristic analysis

    Arch Gen Psychiatry

    (1987)
  • L.N. Robins et al.

    The Composite International Diagnostic Interview: an epidemiologic instrument suitable for use in conjunction with different diagnostic systems and in different cultures

    Arch Gen Psychiatry

    (1988)
  • R.A. Moore

    The prevalence of alcoholism in a community general hospital

    Am J Psychiatry

    (1971)
  • R.A. Moore

    The diagnosis of alcoholism in a psychiatric hospital: a trial of the Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test (MAST)

    Am J Psychiatry

    (1972)
  • W.N. Friedrich et al.

    A factor analytic study of the Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test

    Psychol Rep

    (1978)
  • T. McAuley et al.

    Comparative effectiveness of self and family forms of the Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test

    J Stud Alcohol

    (1978)
  • A.R. Favazza et al.

    The Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test: application in a general military hospital

    Q J Stud Alcohol

    (1974)
  • B.J. Zung

    Factor structure of the Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test

    J Stud Alcohol

    (1978)
  • Cited by (84)

    • Short-Form Mini Nutritional Assessment as a useful method of predicting the development of postoperative delirium in elderly patients undergoing orthopedic surgery

      2016, General Hospital Psychiatry
      Citation Excerpt :

      Functional status was evaluated using the Barthel Index (score range, 0–100: 0 = completely dependent, 100 = completely independent) and the Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADLs) scale (score range, 0–8: 0 = completely independent, 8 = completely dependent) [25, 26]. Alcohol use was assessed using the CAGE questionnaire [27]. The CAGE questionnaire, the name of which is acronym of its four questions.

    • Addiction screening and diagnostic tools: 'Refuting' and 'unmasking' claims to legitimacy

      2015, International Journal of Drug Policy
      Citation Excerpt :

      Together, the CAGE, MAST and AUDIT tools are variously described as ‘common’ (Dhalla & Kopec, 2007, p. 33) or the ‘most popular’ (Hays, Merz & Nicholas, 1995, p. 277) alcohol screening tools. Magruder-Habib, Stevens, and Alling (1993, p. 435) confidently describe the ‘widespread use and acceptance’ of these tools as ‘gold standards’. These are the tools most frequently evaluated in reviews and tend to be the tools endorsed by authoritative expert sources (Allen & Wilson, 2003; Haber et al., 2009).

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    Paper presented at the 15th Annual Alcohol Epidemiology Symposium, The Kettil Bruun Society for Social and Epidemiologic Research on Alcohol, Maastricht, The Netherlands, 11–16 June 1989. This research was supported by a grant from the National Institute on Alcohol and Alcohol Abuse (ROI-AA-07138).

    View full text