Suppr超能文献

并非所有酒精使用障碍标准都同样严重:针对大学生饮酒者个体标准的严重程度分级。

Not all alcohol use disorder criteria are equally severe: Toward severity grading of individual criteria in college drinkers.

机构信息

Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Missouri.

Department of Psychological Sciences, Purdue University.

出版信息

Psychol Addict Behav. 2019 Feb;33(1):35-49. doi: 10.1037/adb0000443. Epub 2019 Jan 24.

Abstract

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) diagnosis in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association, 2013) contains a severity gradient based on number of criteria endorsed, implicitly assuming criteria are interchangeable. However, criteria vary widely in endorsement rates, implying differences in the latent severity associated with a symptom (e.g., Lane, Steinley, & Sher, 2016) and demonstrating criteria are not interchangeable (Lane & Sher, 2015). We evaluated whether variation in the severity of criteria could be resolved by employing multiple indicators of each criterion varying in item-level severity. We assessed 909 undergraduate students aged 18 years or older with at least 12 drinking occasions in the past year. Participants self-administered questions on alcohol consumption and past year AUD symptoms via an online survey. For each of the 11 AUD criteria, we selected three indicators based on the difficulty values of the one-parameter logistic item response theory model ranging from low to high. We first tested a higher order AUD factor defined by 11 lower order criterion factors, χ2(551) = 2,959.35, p < .0001; root mean square error of approximation = 0.09. The 33 items were used to create severity scores: a criterion count (0-11), symptom count (0-33), and factor scores derived from a bifactor model. Though our new scores resulted in incremental validity over DSM-5 across a range of external validators, when the standardized regression estimates were compared, the new scores did not consistently outperform the DSM-5 suggesting this approach is viable for developing more sensitive diagnostic instruments but needs further refinement. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

摘要

酒精使用障碍(AUD)的诊断在《精神障碍诊断与统计手册》第五版(DSM-5;美国精神病学协会,2013 年)中包含一个基于所认可的标准数量的严重程度梯度,这暗示标准是可互换的。然而,标准的认可率差异很大,这意味着与一个症状相关的潜在严重程度存在差异(例如,Lane、Steinley 和 Sher,2016),并表明标准不可互换(Lane 和 Sher,2015)。我们评估了通过使用在项目难度级别上变化的每个标准的多个指标,是否可以解决标准严重程度的变化问题。我们评估了 909 名年龄在 18 岁或以上、过去一年至少有 12 次饮酒经历的大学生。参与者通过在线调查自行回答关于饮酒量和过去一年 AUD 症状的问题。对于 AUD 的 11 个标准中的每一个,我们根据单参数逻辑项目反应理论模型的难度值选择了三个指标,范围从低到高。我们首先测试了一个由 11 个低阶标准因素定义的高阶 AUD 因素,χ2(551) = 2959.35,p <.0001;近似均方根误差 = 0.09。33 个项目用于创建严重程度评分:标准计数(0-11)、症状计数(0-33)和来自双因素模型的因子分数。尽管我们的新分数在一系列外部验证器上产生了比 DSM-5 更高的增量有效性,但当比较标准化回归估计值时,新分数并没有始终优于 DSM-5,这表明这种方法可用于开发更敏感的诊断工具,但需要进一步改进。(PsycINFO 数据库记录(c)2019 APA,保留所有权利)。

相似文献

1
Not all alcohol use disorder criteria are equally severe: Toward severity grading of individual criteria in college drinkers.
Psychol Addict Behav. 2019 Feb;33(1):35-49. doi: 10.1037/adb0000443. Epub 2019 Jan 24.
4
Should symptom frequency be factored into scalar measures of alcohol use disorder severity?
Addiction. 2010 Sep;105(9):1568-79. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2010.02994.x. Epub 2010 Jun 21.
5
Latent Class Analysis of DSM-5 Alcohol Use Disorder Criteria Among Heavy-Drinking College Students.
J Subst Abuse Treat. 2015 Oct;57:81-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jsat.2015.05.006. Epub 2015 May 16.
6
DSM-IV criteria endorsement patterns in alcohol dependence: relationship to severity.
Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2008 Feb;32(2):306-13. doi: 10.1111/j.1530-0277.2007.00582.x. Epub 2007 Dec 21.
7
Toward DSM-V: mapping the alcohol use disorder continuum in college students.
Drug Alcohol Depend. 2011 Nov 1;118(2-3):202-8. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2011.03.021. Epub 2011 Apr 22.
9
An item-response theory analysis of DSM-IV alcohol-use disorder criteria and "binge" drinking in undergraduates.
J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2010 May;71(3):418-23. doi: 10.15288/jsad.2010.71.418.

引用本文的文献

1
Rasch analysis of DSM-5 alcohol use disorder in a large inpatient sample.
Alcohol Clin Exp Res (Hoboken). 2025 May;49(5):1076-1085. doi: 10.1111/acer.70029. Epub 2025 Apr 11.
2
Key Terms and Concepts in Alcohol Use and Problems: A Critical Evaluation.
Subst Use. 2025 Mar 12;19:29768357241312555. doi: 10.1177/29768357241312555. eCollection 2025 Jan-Dec.
3
Prevalence of Cannabis Use Disorder: A Meta-Analysis of Population Surveys.
J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2025 Jan;86(1):25-38. doi: 10.15288/jsad.23-00368. Epub 2024 Jun 26.
4
Variants of the P3 event-related potential operate as indicators of distinct mechanisms contributing to problematic alcohol use.
Neuropsychopharmacology. 2024 Nov;49(12):1819-1826. doi: 10.1038/s41386-024-01874-7. Epub 2024 May 11.
5
Should we promote alcohol problems as a continuum? Implications for policy and practice.
Drugs (Abingdon Engl). 2024;31(2):271-281. doi: 10.1080/09687637.2023.2187681. Epub 2023 Mar 31.
6
Tools to implement measurement-based care (MBC) in the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD): toward a consensus.
Addict Sci Clin Pract. 2024 Feb 28;19(1):14. doi: 10.1186/s13722-024-00446-w.
7
Predictors of symptom course in alcohol use disorder.
Alcohol Clin Exp Res (Hoboken). 2023 Dec;47(12):2288-2300. doi: 10.1111/acer.15201. Epub 2023 Oct 25.
8
Examination of the mild, moderate, and severe alcohol use disorder severity indicators using a nationally representative sample.
Psychol Addict Behav. 2024 Sep;38(6):668-675. doi: 10.1037/adb0000983. Epub 2023 Dec 21.
9
Should we embrace the term 'preaddiction'?
Neuropsychopharmacology. 2024 Feb;49(3):495-496. doi: 10.1038/s41386-023-01764-4. Epub 2023 Nov 15.

本文引用的文献

1
Criteria Definitions and Network Relations: The Importance of Criterion Thresholds.
Clin Psychol Sci. 2018;6(4):506-516. doi: 10.1177/2167702617747657. Epub 2017 Dec 28.
2
Evidence that psychopathology symptom networks have limited replicability.
J Abnorm Psychol. 2017 Oct;126(7):969-988. doi: 10.1037/abn0000276.
4
Meta-analysis of DSM alcohol use disorder criteria severities: structural consistency is only 'skin deep'.
Psychol Med. 2016 Jun;46(8):1769-84. doi: 10.1017/S0033291716000404. Epub 2016 Mar 28.
5
Limits of Current Approaches to Diagnosis Severity Based on Criterion Counts: An Example with DSM-5 Alcohol Use Disorder.
Clin Psychol Sci. 2015 Nov 1;3(6):819-835. doi: 10.1177/2167702614553026. Epub 2014 Nov 26.
6
Diagnostic Issues and Controversies in DSM-5: Return of the False Positives Problem.
Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2016;12:105-32. doi: 10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032814-112800. Epub 2016 Jan 11.
7
Evaluating bifactor models: Calculating and interpreting statistical indices.
Psychol Methods. 2016 Jun;21(2):137-50. doi: 10.1037/met0000045. Epub 2015 Nov 2.
8
Latent Class Analysis of DSM-5 Alcohol Use Disorder Criteria Among Heavy-Drinking College Students.
J Subst Abuse Treat. 2015 Oct;57:81-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jsat.2015.05.006. Epub 2015 May 16.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验