Overall, across several ascertainment strategies, AUDIT-P PRS outperformed AUDIT-C as a predictor of both normative and disordered drinking (see Figure 2 for an overview). For example, AUDIT-P PRS predicted up to 3.3% of the variance in the lifetime maximum number of drinks consumed in a 24-hour period (although this was a clear outlier in terms of variance explained), 1.1% of the variance in AUDIT-P scores, and 0.7% of the variance in DSM-5 AUD symptom counts. Exceptions to the superior performance of AUDIT-P PRS were observed within ALSPAC, where AUDIT-C PRS explained higher proportions of variance than AUDIT-P PRS in some adolescent AUDIT-C and AUDIT-P assessments (prior to age 23; see Supplemental Materials). AUDIT-C PRS also accounted for more variance in DSM-IV AD in ALSPAC.
