Psychometric Performance of DSM-IV Alcohol Use Disorders in Young Adulthood: Evidence From an Australian General Population Sample

Mewton, Louise; Teesson, Maree; Slade, Tim; Cottler, Linda B.

doi:10.15288/jsad.2011.72.811

Cited by 27 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, validity should be evaluated by determining the association of criteria or diagnoses with external validators, including those that are antecedent (e.g., family history), concurrent (which indicate current state) or prospective (which predict prognosis or course). Second, although most IRT studies (Table 3) were in U.S. samples, a number of studies were conducted in other countries, mainly for alcohol (Argentina, Mexico, and Poland (Borges et al, 2011; Borges et al, 2010; Cherpitel et al, 2010); Israel (Shmulewitz et al, 2010); Australia (Mewton et al, 2011a; Mewton et al, 2011b); Australia, Brazil, Canada, Finland, and Japan (Preuss et al, 2014); and Brazil (Castaldelli-Maia et al, 2015)), with two for cannabis (Australia (Mewton et al, 2010) and France (Piontek et al, 2011)) and one for tobacco (Israel (Shmulewitz et al, 2011)). Those studies indicated that the same relationship between dependence and abuse criteria was found in many other countries; unidimensionality results were not limited to U.S. samples.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, in DSM-5, the distinction between dependence and abuse was removed, replaced with one combined “substance use disorder” consisting of eleven criteria to diagnose all SUD (Table 1), of which 2 or more criteria within a 12-month period were required (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). A craving criterion (strong desire for the substance) was added, since it fit well with the dependence and abuse criteria across substances (alcohol (Borges et al, 2011; Casey et al, 2012; Castaldelli-Maia et al, 2015; Cherpitel et al, 2010; Hasin et al, 2012; Keyes et al, 2011a; Mewton et al, 2011a; Mewton et al, 2011b; Preuss et al, 2014); stimulants (Gilder et al, 2014; Hasin et al, 2012); tobacco (Chung et al, 2012; Shmulewitz et al, 2011; Strong et al, 2009; Strong et al, 2012); cannabis, heroin (Hasin et al, 2012); inhalants (Ridenour et al, 2014)), had potential clinical utility, and to enhance consistency with ICD-10 (Hasin et al, 2013b). A withdrawal criterion was added for cannabis given considerable evidence for its existence (Hasin et al, 2013b), and tobacco disorder criteria were aligned with the other substances (American Psychiatric Association, 2013).…”

Section: Diagnostic Criteria For Sudmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hazardous use was more likely to be endorsed by males (studies 1–3, 9, 11, 13, 14, 22, 28; and (Agrawal and Lynskey, 2007; Delforterie et al, 2015a)) and younger participants (studies 3, 9, 10, 15, 24). Hazardous use may be assessing a distinct dimension of SUD liability (Hasin et al, 2012), or a general tendency to disinhibition or antisocial behaviors more prevalent in younger and male participants (Mewton et al, 2011b, Mewton et al, 2010, Martin et al, 2008), warranting further investigation. Quit/control was less likely to be endorsed by younger participants (studies 2, 3, 9, 10, 14, 15, 25, 26), perhaps reflecting that younger individuals may not try to control use.…”

Section: Psychometric Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Commonalities and Differences Across Substance Use Disorders: Phenomenological and Epidemiological Aspects

Shmulewitz

Greene

Hasin

2015

Alcohol Clin Exp Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Although psychoactive substances vary in many ways, they have important commonalties, particularly in their ability to lead to an addiction syndrome. The field lacks an updated review of the commonalities and differences in the phenomenology of alcohol, cannabis, tobacco, stimulants, opioids, hallucinogens, sedatives/tranquilizers and inhalants and their related substance use disorders (SUD). Methods DSM-IV and DSM-5 SUD diagnostic criteria were reviewed, as was evidence from recent epidemiological and clinical research: psychometric studies (test-retest reliability, latent trait analysis); physiological indicators (tolerance, withdrawal); prevalence and age of onset. Information was incorporated from previous reviews, PubMed and Scopus literature searches, and data from large U.S. national surveys. Results Empirical evidence in the form of test-retest reliability and unidimensionality supports use of the same DSM-IV dependence or DSM-5 SUD diagnostic criteria across substances. For most substances, the criteria sets were generally most informative in general population samples at moderate-to-severe levels of SUD. Across substances, two criteria (tolerance and use in hazardous situations) were identified as functioning differently in population subgroups. Since substances have different pharmacological effects, withdrawal is assessed using substance-specific symptoms, while tolerance is not; issues remain with the assessment of tolerance. Alcohol, tobacco, and cannabis were consistently identified as the substances with earliest onset of use, highest prevalence of lifetime use, and highest prevalence of lifetime disorder. Conclusions Despite differences between psychoactive substances, the generic DSM criteria set appear equally applicable across substances. Additional studies of tolerance and hazardous use will be useful for future nosologies. Alcohol, cannabis, and tobacco are the substances with the greatest public health impact due to the high prevalence and early onset of their use, and the potential all three substances have to lead to addiction.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Diagnostic Criteria For Sudmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Psychometric Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Commonalities and Differences Across Substance Use Disorders: Phenomenological and Epidemiological Aspects

Shmulewitz

Greene

Hasin

2015

Alcohol Clin Exp Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To avoid misinterpretations and use of an inaccurate diagnose [44], we used the whole continuum of severity instead of a threshold. Indeed, studies reported that the total information provided by the dependence criteria was comparable among younger and older adults [45].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simultaneous use of Alcohol, Tobacco and Cannabis in Relation to Severity of Substance Dependence: A Study among Young Swiss Men

Baggio¹

2014

J Addict Res Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This study investigated patterns of the simultaneous use of alcohol, tobacco and cannabis among young polydrug users, and whether use of one substance might be a cue for use of another and associations with the severity of substance dependence. Methods:The study focused on 3 subsamples from the ongoing Swiss Cohort Study on Substance Use Risk Factors (C-SURF, N=5,990). It used 12 months of data on alcohol/tobacco co-users, alcohol/cannabis co-users and tobacco/cannabis co-users (N=2,660, 1,755 and 1,460 respectively. Simultaneous use, numbers of symptoms of substance dependence, and hazardous use of alcohol, tobacco and cannabis were assessed. The effect of simultaneous polydrug use (SPU) on the numbers of symptoms of substance dependence was tested using analysis of variance.Results: Polydrug use was most common as SPU, and less common as non/occasional SPU. Moreover, when participants started to use one substance while using another, the severity of substance dependence was more strongly associated with the triggered substance than with cue. Conclusions:This study highlights the necessity to take SPU into account. First, SPU rather than separate drug use was the most common pattern for polydrug users. Second, frequent SPU was associated with increased numbers of symptoms of substance dependence compared to non/occasional SPU. Furthermore, SPU may reveal the severity of substance use dependence, when substance use is triggered by a cue substance. For these reasons, SPU should be a serious cause for concern for prevention and intervention purposes.

show abstract

“…Já os critérios para a classificação de abuso, englobam também as conseqüências sociais e são descritos no DSM IV como: consumo contínuo, apesar dos problemas sociais ou interpessoais persistentes ou recorrentes, causados ou aumentados pelos efeitos da substância; uso recorrente em situações nas quais isto representa um perigo físico; uso recorrente que resulta em negligência de obrigações do trabalho, escola ou casa e problemas recorrentes relacionados a questões legais 71 . …”

Section: -Uso De áLcoolunclassified

Significados do uso de álcool e tabaco entre profissionais de saúde e a assistência prestada aos usuários da Atenção Primária em Saúde

Reisdorfer¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Psychometric Performance of DSM-IV Alcohol Use Disorders in Young Adulthood: Evidence From an Australian General Population Sample

Cited by 27 publications

References 0 publications

Commonalities and Differences Across Substance Use Disorders: Phenomenological and Epidemiological Aspects

Commonalities and Differences Across Substance Use Disorders: Phenomenological and Epidemiological Aspects

Simultaneous use of Alcohol, Tobacco and Cannabis in Relation to Severity of Substance Dependence: A Study among Young Swiss Men

Significados do uso de álcool e tabaco entre profissionais de saúde e a assistência prestada aos usuários da Atenção Primária em Saúde

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About