{{ summaryHeading }}
{{ primaryMetric }}
{{ summarySecondaryLine }}
{{ routeBadge }} {{ timeBadge }} {{ safetyBadge }}
Pick the question you need answered before choosing AUDIT-C, AUDIT-10, or CAGE.
Use the concern that should not be missed in the first pass.
Estimate one sitting, including reading instructions and checking the score output.
Choose how the completed screener output will likely be used.
Use balanced for general routing, or favor the reference frame you already need.
Keep standard unless your review intentionally uses a broader or stricter CAGE line.
Screener route Fit Questions Recall Best use Reference line Limit Copy
{{ row.shortName }} {{ row.slug }} {{ row.fitLabel }} {{ row.questionCount }} {{ row.recall }} {{ row.bestUse }} {{ row.referenceLine }} {{ row.limit }}
Decision Recommendation Details Copy
{{ row.decision }} {{ row.recommendation }} {{ row.details }}
Source slug Status Source role Preserved behavior Copy
{{ row.slug }} {{ row.status }} {{ row.role }} {{ row.preserved }}
Tags: Diagnostics, Psychology, Psychometrics
Export to PDF Fullscreen
Customize
Advanced
:

Introduction

Alcohol screening starts with choosing the right question. AUDIT-C is a short screen for drinking frequency, usual quantity, and heavy-drinking days. AUDIT-10 gives the fuller Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test view by adding dependence and harm items. CAGE is a brief dependence-cue screen built around cut down, annoyed, guilty, and eye-opener prompts.

The Alcohol Screener Comparator ranks those three routes against the situation you choose. It uses the screening goal, main signal, time budget, review setting, cutoff emphasis, and CAGE threshold lens to recommend a first route. The result is a route fit score. It does not estimate a person's alcohol risk and it does not replace the score from the selected screener.

Review goal triage, risk, prep Main signal amount, harm, control Route fit 0 to 100 match AUDIT-C 3 questions AUDIT-10 10 questions CAGE 4 questions Route table ranking and limits Route map fit and coverage Briefing exports
The comparator turns a review context into a ranked screening route, then shows why the shorter or fuller option fits.

Use the top route as a starting point for choosing a screener. A high fit score means the route matches the selected workflow and concern. The actual alcohol screening result still comes from completing AUDIT-C, AUDIT-10, or CAGE and reading that score with the correct cutoff or score range.

The route ranking runs in the browser. Exports are still sensitive once saved. CSV, DOCX, chart image, and JSON files can reveal alcohol-screening context, so handle them like private health notes when they refer to a person, clinic, workplace, program, or family situation.

Technical Details

The comparison uses fixed profiles for three established alcohol screeners. Each profile includes the number of questions, recall window, typical completion time, best use, reference line, and main limitation. The selected context changes route priority, but it does not edit the questions or scoring rules used by the original screeners.

Screener Main job Questions Reference line shown by the comparator Limit to remember
AUDIT-C Fast consumption screening for frequency, usual quantity, and heavy-drinking days. 3 Common references use 3+ or 4+ lines; the VA/DoD emphasis uses a 5+ line. It does not directly ask about withdrawal, control loss, injuries, or other harm.
AUDIT-10 Full AUDIT screening across consumption, dependence symptoms, and alcohol-related harm. 10 WHO-style zones are 0 to 7, 8 to 15, 16 to 19, and 20 to 40. It takes longer and remains a screening instrument rather than a diagnosis.
CAGE Quick dependence-cue review for cutting down, criticism, guilt, and eye-opener drinking. 4 The standard lens is 2+ yes answers, with optional 1+ and 3+ comparison lenses. It can miss hazardous drinking that appears before dependence cues are obvious.
Route fit = coverage match + time fit + goal bonus + signal bonus + setting bonus + cutoff bonus

Coverage match compares each screener against the selected need. Consumption concerns lift AUDIT-C. Mixed, program, or full-risk reviews lift AUDIT-10 because it includes consumption, dependence symptoms, and harm items. Dependence concerns lift CAGE, especially when the cutoff emphasis points to CAGE dependence thresholds.

The time budget changes the ranking because a one-minute check should not be treated the same as a planned review. AUDIT-C and CAGE receive more support when time is tight. AUDIT-10 remains visible when the broader information is worth the extra questions.

The Source Tool Ledger exists for auditability. It states that the original AUDIT-C, AUDIT-10, and CAGE routes keep their own questions, thresholds, exports, and interpretation rules. This comparator only helps choose which route to use first and what route to keep available as follow-up.

Everyday Use & Decision Guide

Start with the decision in front of you. Choose fast unhealthy-use triage when the first question is about amount, frequency, or heavy days. Choose full risk lane when consequences, dependence symptoms, and follow-up planning all matter. Choose dependence-oriented cues when control loss, guilt, criticism, or morning drinking is the main concern.

Match the time budget to the real setting. A waiting-room form, private self-check, or quick primary-care question may favor AUDIT-C. A behavioral-health review, program intake, or planned alcohol discussion may justify AUDIT-10. CAGE can be useful as a brief follow-up when dependence cues are already part of the story, but it should not be the only broad screen for unhealthy alcohol use.

Use the cutoff emphasis when the next reader expects a specific reference frame. The comparison can favor common AUDIT-C references, the VA/DoD-style AUDIT-C 5+ line, WHO AUDIT zones, or CAGE threshold lenses. These options change the route recommendation and wording, not the underlying screener score.

Export only when the record has a clear use. Copy a row for a short note, save a table for documentation, download a chart when the visual comparison helps explain the route choice, or use JSON for structured handoff. A private self-check may be better left unsaved if an export would create unnecessary privacy risk.

Step-by-Step Guide

  1. Select the screening goal: fast unhealthy-use triage, full risk lane, dependence-oriented cues, or visit preparation.
  2. Choose the signal you most need to catch, such as consumption, harm, dependence cues, or a mixed concern.
  3. Set the available time and review setting so the route ranking reflects the actual workflow.
  4. Open advanced settings only when cutoff emphasis or the CAGE yes-answer threshold matters to the comparison.
  5. Read the Screener Route Table first. The top row is the strongest route match for the current settings.
  6. Check the Alcohol Route Fit Map and Alcohol Coverage Matrix when you need to see how close the alternatives are.
  7. Review the Follow-Up Briefing before copying or exporting, because it names the recommended route and privacy caution.
  8. Use the Source Tool Ledger to confirm what each separate screener route preserves.
  9. Export CSV, DOCX, chart images, or JSON only when the file is useful and can be stored appropriately.

Interpreting Results

The first row in the Screener Route Table is the recommended starting route. The fit label tells whether that route is a primary route, strong fit, use with caveat, or secondary fit. Read the question count, recall window, best use, reference line, and limit before deciding that one number settles the choice.

Output cue What it means Practical next move
AUDIT-C ranks first The situation mostly needs a quick read on consumption or unhealthy-use triage. Use AUDIT-C first, then move to AUDIT-10 if harm or dependence cues appear.
AUDIT-10 ranks first The review needs consumption, dependence symptoms, and harm cues together. Complete the full AUDIT and interpret the score against its risk zones.
CAGE ranks first The context is focused on dependence cues rather than drinking quantity. Use CAGE as a cue check and keep AUDIT-C or AUDIT-10 available for broader screening.
Top routes are close More than one route fits the selected context. Use the shorter route first when time is tight, or the fuller route when follow-up space exists.
Coverage matrix differs by route Each screener sees a different part of alcohol-related risk. Pick the screen whose coverage matches the concern you cannot afford to miss.

Screening should not delay direct help. Injury, withdrawal symptoms, pregnancy-related concern, severe medical complications, unsafe situations, or urgent concern from others need a clinician, emergency service, or local support pathway rather than repeated comparison runs.

Worked Examples

Fast primary-care triage

A clinic has a short check-in window and mainly needs to ask about drinking frequency, usual quantity, and heavy days. With fast triage, consumption signal, primary-care setting, and an under-one-minute time budget, AUDIT-C should usually rise to the top because it is built for a brief consumption screen.

Full review before follow-up

A counselor wants a fuller picture before a planned visit. The selected goal is full risk lane, the signal is mixed, and the time budget allows three to five minutes. AUDIT-10 should usually lead because it covers consumption, possible dependence symptoms, and alcohol-related harm in one scoring route.

Dependence-cue concern

A person reports guilt about drinking and occasional morning drinking, while current quantity is not the first question. With dependence-oriented cues selected and the CAGE threshold kept at 2+ yes answers, CAGE may become the first route or a close follow-up because its prompts match that concern.

FAQ:

Is the fit score an alcohol-risk score?

No. The fit score ranks which screener route best matches the selected context. Alcohol-risk interpretation comes from completing the chosen screener and reading its own score.

Why compare AUDIT-C with AUDIT-10?

AUDIT-C is the three-question consumption part of the full AUDIT. It is useful when time is short or the first question is drinking amount. AUDIT-10 is better when dependence symptoms and harm items also matter.

Why include CAGE if it is not a broad consumption screen?

CAGE is still useful when the concern is control, criticism, guilt, or morning drinking. The comparator treats it as a dependence-cue route and warns against using it as the only broad unhealthy-use screen.

Do advanced settings change official cutoff rules?

No. Advanced settings change the route comparison and recommendation text. The underlying screener questions, scoring, and interpretation rules remain separate.

Can I share the exports?

Share exports only with someone who has a clear reason to see alcohol-screening context. Tables, charts, and JSON can reveal sensitive review details even when they do not contain full questionnaire answers.

When should I stop comparing and seek help?

Seek direct help when alcohol use is tied to withdrawal symptoms, injury, pregnancy concern, medication risk, severe health problems, unsafe situations, or urgent concern from others. Screening can support that conversation, but it should not delay care.

Glossary:

AUDIT-C
A three-item alcohol screen focused on drinking frequency, usual quantity, and heavy-drinking occasions.
AUDIT-10
The ten-item Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test, covering consumption, dependence symptoms, and alcohol-related harm.
CAGE
A four-question dependence-cue screen based on cut down, annoyed, guilty, and eye-opener prompts.
Fit score
The comparator's 0 to 100 route score for how well a screener matches the selected review context.
Screening cutoff
A score line or yes-answer count that tells the reader when a screening result should prompt more review.
Standard drink
A serving with a defined amount of pure alcohol. In U.S. guidance, one standard drink contains about 14 grams of pure alcohol.

References: