QFI

(redirected from Quantity-Frequency Index)
AcronymDefinition
QFIQuad Flat I-Leaded Package
QFIQualified Flying Instructor
QFIQuadrise Fuels International, PLC (UK)
QFIQualifications for Industry (UK)
QFIQuantity-Frequency Index (alcohol use)
QFIQuality Foods, Inc.
QFIQueen Forfeits Immediately (internet card game)
QFIQuest for Immortality (Kings of Chaos gaming group)
References in periodicals archive ?
The first was a quantity-frequency index, constructed using the following questions: 'how often in the past month did you drink alcohol', and 'how many drinks did you have in the last two months on the occasion where you drank the most'.
The quantity-frequency index was based on the number of days a particular drug was used, summed across 12 drugs: alcohol, marijuana, hallucinogens, crack, cocaine, heroin, inhalants, quaaludes, barbiturates, tranquilizers, amphetamines, and other opiates.
On the quantity-frequency index, the distribution curve for those reporting AOD use at pretest had a natural break that separated the experimental users (33%) from the users/abusers (28%).
The 132 new intervention youth showed larger decreases in AOD use on the quantity-frequency index (ES = .44) and on the number-of-drugs index (ES = .51) than did the 47 adolescents who reentered the program (quantity-frequency index, ES = .14; number-of-drugs index, ES = .25).
The change score on the two AOD indexes was the dependent variable for two separate sets of multiple regression analyses, one based on the quantity-frequency index and the other on the number-of-drugs index, both continuous variables.
The dependent variables, or outcome measures, were the categorical success measures: success1, based on change in score on the quantity-frequency index, and success2, based on change in score on the number-of-drugs index.
Although males reported higher overall AOD use, it was not significant for either the quantity-frequency index ([t.sub.311] = 1.69, p = .92) or the number-of-drugs index ([t.sub.412] = 1.37, p = .172).
The 132 panel intervention youth showed a highly significant reduction in AOD use from pretest to posttest (correlated t test) as measured by the quantity-frequency index ([t.sub.262] = 4.25, p = .000) and the number-of-drugs index ([t.sub.262] = 4.99, p = .000).
The difference between groups in terms of reduction in AOD use was highly significant for the quantity-frequency index ([t.sub.130] = 3.32, p = .001), as well as significant for the number-of-drugs index ([t.sub.130] = 2.l4, p = .035).
Results for the quantity-frequency index (change score) were highly significant: dosage (p = .0001), level of use at pretest (p = .0000), and site (p = .0000).
Logistic regression analysis based on that sample showed the ACI to be a better predictor of a total score of self-reported alcohol related problems than the CAGE questionnaire, the quantity-frequency index, subjective problem self-ratings and other selected descriptive factors (O'Hare and Tran, 1997).
Chronbach alphas in both samples were comparable (socio-emotional .88, .89; community .79, .76), and the CAPS demonstrated good concurrent validity with the quantity-frequency index, a version of the MAST, and peak drinking index from the AUDIT (O'Hare, 1997; O'Hare, 1998).