Manual for the Benzodiazepine Dependence Questionnaire (BDEPQ)

Recommendations

Info

DEVELOPMENT 9 BZD users in the Australian population. The di erence between the sample and the population was larger than due to chance indicating that the sample was not randomly drawn from the population ( 2 15 =64:20�p < :05). The majority of participants were married or living as if they were married. Compared with estimates of the population of BZD users, the sample had fewer widowed or never married people and more who were separated or divorced. This di erence may be related to the di erences between the age of the population and the sample discussed above. A goodness-of- t chi square test indicated that these di erences were due to sampling alone ( 2 4 =8:20�p = ns). Table 2 compares participants in development sample with estimates of the population of BZD users on occupation, ethnicity, and the age at which participants left school. The majority of the sample was not working and of those who were employed most were managers, professionals, or para-professionals. A greater percentage of the population were not working at the time of interview and hence their current occupation was `Not Applicable'. The sample has a smaller percentage of younger people, who do not yet have occupations, and of people over 80, who have retired compared with the population estimates. There are di erences between the sample and the population estimates where a current occupation is known. The sample has more managers, professional people, and para-professionals while there is a greater proportion of tradespersons, salespersons and personal service workers, plant andmachine operators and drivers, or labourers and related workers in the estimated population of BZD users. This di erence probably re ects the audiences of the radio stations and newspapers which advertised the request for participants. As above, the goodness-of- t test indicated that it was unlikely that the sample was randomly drawn for the population ( 2 8 =47:31�p < :05). The ethnicity of the sample was evaluated by asking participants if they spoke a language other than English at home, and whether they were born overseas. A comparison of the responses of the sample and of the population estimates is shown in Table 2. Only 1.8% of the sample spoke another language at home compared with the population estimate of 9.4%. There was a poor t between the sample and the population estimate indicating a non-random sample ( 2 1 =17:58�p < :05). While 26.7% of the population of BZD users were estimated to have been born overseas, 21.7% of the sample had migrated to Australia, a di erence within the limits of sampling variation ( 2 1 =2:87�p = ns). The age at which the sample and the estimated population of BZD users had left school is also shown in Table 2. Participants in the development sample were older when they left school compared with estimates for the Australian population of BZD users. A goodness-of- t test showed that the sample was not randomly drawn from the population ( 2 3 =86:20�p < :05). This nding is consistent with the greater proportion of professional people in the sample. In summary, the comparisons between the sample and estimates from the
10 DEVELOPMENT Table 1: Comparison of sample and population estimates of age, gender and marital status Population Sample estimates n = 688984 n=267 Gender (percent female) 66.4% 56.2% Age 00-04 0.1% 0 05-09 0 0 10-14 0.1% 0 15-19 1.4% 0 20-24 1.6% 0 25-29 2.8% 1.5% 30-34 3.6% 0.4% 35-39 4.0% 4.5% 40-44 5.6% 8.2% 45-49 5.8% 10.9% 50-54 7.1% 8.6% 55-59 8.1% 10.9% 60-64 11.9% 14.6% 65-69 12.5% 15.0% 70-74 14.4% 14.2% 75-79 10.3% 10.5% 80+ 10.8% 0.7% Marital status Married including de facto 58.4% 60.7% Separated 2.7% 4.5% Divorced 6.8% 8.2% Widowed 22.5% 17.6% Never married or single 9.52% 7.5%
Page 1 and 2: Manual for the Benzodiazepine Depen
Page 3 and 4: List of Tables 1 Comparison of samp
Page 5 and 6: 2 RATIONALE AND BACKGROUND Careful
Page 7 and 8: 4 RATIONALE AND BACKGROUND BZD depe
Page 9 and 10: 6 SCORING INSTRUCTIONS Many of the
Page 11: 8 DEVELOPMENT In general higher sco
Page 15 and 16: 12 DEVELOPMENT NHS of the Australia
Page 17 and 18: 14 DEVELOPMENT Table 3: Doses of BZ
Page 19 and 20: 16 DEVELOPMENT CIDI diagnoses of BZ
Page 21 and 22: 18 DEVELOPMENT BZD withdrawal sympt
Page 23 and 24: 20 DEVELOPMENT Table 6: Neuroticism
Page 25 and 26: 22 DEVELOPMENT than 0.4 were discar
Page 27 and 28: 24 DEVELOPMENT Table 7: The results
Page 35 and 36: 32 PROPERTIES OF BDEPQ TOTAL SCORES
Page 37 and 38: 34 PROPERTIES OF BDEPQ TOTAL SCORES
Page 39 and 40: 36 VALIDITY OF THE BDEPQ CIDI diagn
Page 41 and 42: 38 VALIDITY OF THE BDEPQ Table 10:
Page 43 and 44: 40 VALIDITY OF THE BDEPQ 2 model (G
Page 45 and 46: 42 VALIDITY OF THE BDEPQ predictive
Page 47 and 48: 44 MEASURES OF WITHDRAWAL 23 would
Page 49 and 50: 46 MEASURES OF WITHDRAWAL Table 11:
Page 55 and 56: 52 ACKNOWLEDGMENT on some structure
Page 57 and 58: 54 REFERENCES References American P
Page 59 and 60: 56 REFERENCES Edwards, G., & Gross,
Page 61 and 62: 58 REFERENCES Nunnally, J. (1967).
Page 63 and 64:
60 BENZODIAZEPINE DEPENDENCE QUESTI
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69:
show all

Manual for the Benzodiazepine Dependence Questionnaire (BDEPQ)

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?