The results from this study should be interpreted in the context of several limitations. The sample analyzed in this study (SAGE) consisted of cases and controls originally ascertained for alcohol dependence; accordingly, rates of CD were higher in our sample (22% meeting case status for CD) than in general population samples; for example, the National Epidemiological Survey of Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC) has reported rates of CD of B5% among a general population-based sample.44 However, NESARC also observes a strong relationship between CD and alcohol dependence;44 accordingly, it is not surprising that we would find elevated rates of CD among a sample ascertained for alcohol dependence. We would also expect the converse to be true: that a sample ascertained based on CD would show high rates of alcohol dependence; accordingly, it would be difficult, and perhaps artificial, to study one disorder outside the context of the other. Our secondary analyses using alcohol dependence symptom counts as a covariate suggested that the results observed in this study for CD were not driven solely through association with alcohol dependence. Similarly, there
