Only AUDIT-P PRS were associated with AUDIT-P scores, accounting for 1.1% of the variance (p = 9.05e-6). AUDIT-C PRS and AUDIT-P PRS were both positively associated with DSM-IV alcohol dependence, explaining 1.0% (p = 4.81e-6) and 0.50% (p = 5.75e-4) of the variance, respectively, although only the AUDIT-C PRS passed multiple testing corrections. Both PRS scores were also positively associated with DSM-IV alcohol dependence symptom count (R2 = 0.8% for both; AUDIT-C p = 3.59e-5, AUDIT-P p = 3.53e-5). For individuals in the top quartile of AUDIT-C PRS, the odds of being diagnosed with AUD was 1.73 (95% C.I. = 1.29–2.33) compared to those in the lowest quartile, while being in the top AUDIT-P PRS quartile was associated with an OR of 1.25 (95% C.I. = 0.93 −1.68) compared to those in the lowest quartile (Figure 1). Due to wider 95% C.I. (suggesting imprecision potentially due to smaller sample size and/or less of a dose-response association pattern), it was difficult to draw comparisons of the ORs across quartiles in the ALSPAC sample. For AUDIT-C, differentiation in likelihood of AUD appeared
