Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2016 Oct;111(10):1720-6.
doi: 10.1111/add.13210. Epub 2015 Dec 28.

Questioning the validity of the 4+/5+ binge or heavy drinking criterion in college and clinical populations

Affiliations
Review

Questioning the validity of the 4+/5+ binge or heavy drinking criterion in college and clinical populations

Matthew R Pearson et al. Addiction. 2016 Oct.

Abstract

Background and aims: The terms 'binge drinking' and 'heavy drinking' are both operationalized typically as 4+/5+ standard drinks per occasion for women/men, and are used commonly as a proxy for non-problematic (<4/<5) versus problematic (4+/5+) drinking in multiple research contexts. The Food and Drug Administration in the United States recently proposed the 4+/5+ criterion as a primary efficacy end-point in their guidance for trials examining new medications for alcohol use disorders (AUDs). Internationally, similar cut-offs have been proposed, with the European Medicines Agency having identified reductions in the number of heavy drinking days (defined as 40/60 g pure alcohol in women/men) as a primary end-point for efficacy trials with a harm reduction goal.

Analysis and evidence: We question the validity of the 4+/5+ cut-off (and other similar cut-offs) on multiple accounts. The 4+/5+ cut-off has not been shown to have unique predictive validity or clinical utility. The cut-off has been created based on retrospective self-reports and its use demonstrates ecological bias. Given strong evidence that the relationship between alcohol consumption and problems related to drinking is at least monotonic, if not linear, there is little existing evidence to support the 4+/5+ cut-off as a valid marker of problematic alcohol use.

Conclusions: There is little empirical evidence for the 4+/5+ standard drinks per occasion threshold for 'binge' or 'heavy' drinking in indexing treatment efficacy. Further consideration of an appropriate threshold seems to be warranted.

Keywords: Alcohol treatment outcome; alcohol use disorders; binge drinking; college students; heavy drinking; heavy episodic drinking.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Demonstration of two hypothetical associations between alcohol use and negative consequences from drinking. As illustrated, a stepwise relationship would clearly distinguish endorsement of alcohol-related problems (hypothetical y-axis) for those who drink < 4 drinks from those who drink 4+ drinks whereas a linear relationship (which is generally found in research) between alcohol-related problems and quantity of drinks fails to provide a meaningful cutoff.

Comment in

References

    1. Jackson KM. Heavy episodic drinking: Determining the predictive utility of five or more drinks. 2010;22(1):68–77. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Johnston LD, O’Malley PM, Miech R a, Bachman JG, Schulenberg JE. Monitoring the Future national results on drug use: 1975--2013: Overview, key findings on adolescent drug use. 2014:90.
    1. Wechsler H, Davenport A, Dowdall G, Moeykens B, Castillo S. Health and behavioral consequences of binge drinking in college: A national survey of students at 140 campuses. J Am Med Assoc. 1994;272:1672–1677. - PubMed
    1. Wechsler H, Dowdall GW, Davenport A. A gender-specific measure of binge drinking among college students. 1995;85(7):5–8. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Center on Alcoholism, Substance Abuse and Addictions BAC estimator. [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2015 Apr 12]. Available from: http://casaa.unm.edu/BACcalc.html.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources