pre-pregnancy) drinking, and identified >3 times more women as “at risk” drinkers than the antenatal report. Although the categories of drinking levels varied between that study and the current analyses, the pattern and extent of differences between antenatal and retrospective report were quite similar. As with the current study, MAST scores at each report were similar, and related to both reports (Jacobson et al., 2002; see also Ernhart, et al., 1988). Similar results were reported by Alvik et al. (2006a; 2006b) in a Norwegian cohort where postnatal retrospective maternal reports of drinking levels collected 6 months postpartum were substantially higher than antenatal reports at either 17 or 30 weeks of gestation. The fact that retrospectively reported intake was greater even during the pregnancy is important because the presumed social pressures to under-report would still be operative.
