RESPONSE-TIMES FOR THE CAGE, SHORT-MAST, AUDIT, AND JELLINEK ALCOHOL SCALES

The CAGE alcohol screening tool has been touted as a good choice for c linical settings because of its brevity. We administered the CAGE and three other alcohol screening instruments (the Short-MAST, AUDIT, and JELLINEK) by microcomputer to 296 clients at a drinking driver treatme nt program and three of the four scales to a second sample of 270 clie nts from six drinking driver treatment programs. The average response times for the CAGE were 31 and 32 sec, respectively, in the first and second samples. The average response time for the JELLINEK was approxi mately five times longer than it was for the CAGE; response time for t he AUDIT averaged four times longer; and response time for the Short-M AST was two and a half times as long. The estimated reliability of the CAGE was the lowest and its standard error of measurement was the hig hest of the four scales. We recommend the Short-MAST as the tool of ch oice if the extra minute of administration time it requires in compari son with the CAGE is not critical.