RATIONALE: Whether the reported poorer mental health of ecstasy users is due to a bias in endorsement of somatic symptoms has been postulated, but rarely examined. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to investigate whether levels of ecstasy use were associated with differential probabilities of endorsing somatic mental health symptoms. METHODS: Current ecstasy users aged 24-30 years (n = 316) were identified from a population-based Australian study. Measures included frequency of ecstasy, meth/amphetamine, and cannabis use and the Goldberg anxiety/depression symptom scales. RESULTS: Multiple indicator, multiple cause models demonstrated no bias towards endorsing somatic symptoms with higher ecstasy use, both with and without adjustment for gender, cannabis, and meth/amphetamine use. CONCLUSIONS: Other studies using alternate measures of mental health should adopt this approach to determine if there is a bias in the endorsement of somatic symptoms among ecstasy users.
RATIONALE: Whether the reported poorer mental health of ecstasy users is due to a bias in endorsement of somatic symptoms has been postulated, but rarely examined. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to investigate whether levels of ecstasy use were associated with differential probabilities of endorsing somatic mental health symptoms. METHODS: Current ecstasy users aged 24-30 years (n = 316) were identified from a population-based Australian study. Measures included frequency of ecstasy, meth/amphetamine, and cannabis use and the Goldberg anxiety/depression symptom scales. RESULTS: Multiple indicator, multiple cause models demonstrated no bias towards endorsing somatic symptoms with higher ecstasy use, both with and without adjustment for gender, cannabis, and meth/amphetamine use. CONCLUSIONS: Other studies using alternate measures of mental health should adopt this approach to determine if there is a bias in the endorsement of somatic symptoms among ecstasy users.
Authors: H Christensen; A F Jorm; A J Mackinnon; A E Korten; P A Jacomb; A S Henderson; B Rodgers Journal: Psychol Med Date: 1999-03 Impact factor: 7.723
Authors: R Thomasius; K Petersen; R Buchert; B Andresen; P Zapletalova; L Wartberg; B Nebeling; A Schmoldt Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2003-03-11 Impact factor: 4.530