Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVE: Technology is continuing to shape the way we collect health data, including data on alcohol use. A number of technologies are being developed to objectively measure intoxication 'in the wild' without relying on self-report; the most immediate solution may be the use of personal breathalysers. In this study, we aimed to determine whether a cost-effective personal breathalyser would perform in a similar manner to a device used for roadside breath testing. METHOD: = 337; 45% men) outside three concerts, administered 5-min interviews, and asked for breath samples on two devices (a personal breathalyser and a police-grade breathalyser). RESULTS: Participants reported having consumed an average of 7.3 standard drinks before the interview and had a mean Blood Alcohol Content of 0.077 g/dl on the police-grade device and 0.085 g/dl on the personal device. Difference scores suggested the personal breathalyser was more likely to over report Blood Alcohol Content (bias = 0.008 g/dl). CONCLUSION: Although the personal device was more likely to over report Blood Alcohol Content compared with the police-grade device, the results suggest that personal devices could be used as a measure of Blood Alcohol Content when collecting data outside of the lab.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Riordan et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: