OBJECTIVE: Irritable and oppositional behaviors are increasingly considered as distinct dimensions of oppositional defiant disorder. However, few studies have explored this multidimensionality across the broader spectrum of disruptive behavior problems (DBPs). This study examined the presence of dimensions and distinct subgroups of childhood DBPs, and the cross-sectional and longitudinal associations between these dimensions. METHOD: Using factor mixture models (FMMs), the presence of dimensions and subgroups of DBPs was assessed in the Generation R Study at ages 6 (n = 6,209) and 10 (n = 4,724) years. Replications were performed in two population-based cohorts (Netherlands Twin Registry, n = 4,402, and Swedish Twin Study of Child and Adolescent Development, n = 1,089) and a clinical sample (n = 1,933). We used cross-lagged modeling in the Generation R Study to assess cross-sectional and longitudinal associations between dimensions. DBPs were assessed using mother-reported responses to the Child Behavior Checklist. RESULTS: Empirically obtained dimensions of DBPs were oppositional behavior (age 6 years), disobedient behavior, rule-breaking behavior (age 10 years), physical aggression, and irritability (both ages). FMMs suggested that one-class solutions had the best model fit for all dimensions in all three population-based cohorts. Similar results were obtained in the clinical sample. All three dimensions, including irritability, predicted subsequent physical aggression (range, 0.08-0.16). CONCLUSION: This study showed that childhood DBPs should be regarded as a multidimensional phenotype rather than comprising distinct subgroups. Incorporating multidimensionality will improve diagnostic accuracy and refine treatment. Future studies need to address the biological validity of the DBP dimensions observed in this study; herein lies an important opportunity for neuroimaging and genetic measures.
OBJECTIVE: Irritable and oppositional behaviors are increasingly considered as distinct dimensions of oppositional defiant disorder. However, few studies have explored this multidimensionality across the broader spectrum of disruptive behavior problems (DBPs). This study examined the presence of dimensions and distinct subgroups of childhood DBPs, and the cross-sectional and longitudinal associations between these dimensions. METHOD: Using factor mixture models (FMMs), the presence of dimensions and subgroups of DBPs was assessed in the Generation R Study at ages 6 (n = 6,209) and 10 (n = 4,724) years. Replications were performed in two population-based cohorts (Netherlands Twin Registry, n = 4,402, and Swedish Twin Study of Child and Adolescent Development, n = 1,089) and a clinical sample (n = 1,933). We used cross-lagged modeling in the Generation R Study to assess cross-sectional and longitudinal associations between dimensions. DBPs were assessed using mother-reported responses to the Child Behavior Checklist. RESULTS: Empirically obtained dimensions of DBPs were oppositional behavior (age 6 years), disobedient behavior, rule-breaking behavior (age 10 years), physical aggression, and irritability (both ages). FMMs suggested that one-class solutions had the best model fit for all dimensions in all three population-based cohorts. Similar results were obtained in the clinical sample. All three dimensions, including irritability, predicted subsequent physical aggression (range, 0.08-0.16). CONCLUSION: This study showed that childhood DBPs should be regarded as a multidimensional phenotype rather than comprising distinct subgroups. Incorporating multidimensionality will improve diagnostic accuracy and refine treatment. Future studies need to address the biological validity of the DBP dimensions observed in this study; herein lies an important opportunity for neuroimaging and genetic measures.
Authors: Mireia Rosa-Justicia; Melanie C Saam; Ulrike M E Schulze; Josefina Castro-Fornieles; Itziar Flamarique; Roger Borràs; Jilly Naaijen; Andrea Dietrich; Pieter J Hoekstra; Tobias Banaschewski; Pascal Aggensteiner; Michael C Craig; Arjun Sethi; Paramala Santosh; Ilyas Sagar-Ouriaghli; Celso Arango; María José Penzol; Daniel Brandeis; Julia E Werhahn; Jeffrey C Glennon; Barbara Franke; Marcel P Zwiers; Jan K Buitelaar Journal: Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry Date: 2020-11-04 Impact factor: 4.785
Authors: Jodi Zik; Christen M Deveney; Jarrod M Ellingson; Simone P Haller; Katharina Kircanski; Elise M Cardinale; Melissa A Brotman; Joel Stoddard Journal: J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry Date: 2021-08-23 Impact factor: 13.113
Authors: Ivonne P M Derks; Koen Bolhuis; Zeynep Yalcin; Romy Gaillard; Manon H J Hillegers; Henrik Larsson; Sebastian Lundström; Paul Lichtenstein; Catharina E M van Beijsterveldt; Meike Bartels; Dorret I Boomsma; Henning Tiemeier; Pauline W Jansen Journal: Obesity (Silver Spring) Date: 2019-04-08 Impact factor: 5.002
Authors: Marit Henriksen; Marit Skrove; Gry Børmark Hoftun; Erik R Sund; Stian Lydersen; Wan-Ling Tseng; Denis G Sukhodolsky Journal: Child Psychiatry Hum Dev Date: 2021-08
Authors: Fiona A Hagenbeek; Peter J Roetman; René Pool; Cornelis Kluft; Amy C Harms; Jenny van Dongen; Olivier F Colins; Simone Talens; Catharina E M van Beijsterveldt; Marjolein M L J Z Vandenbosch; Eveline L de Zeeuw; Sébastien Déjean; Vassilios Fanos; Erik A Ehli; Gareth E Davies; Jouke Jan Hottenga; Thomas Hankemeier; Meike Bartels; Robert R J M Vermeiren; Dorret I Boomsma Journal: Front Psychiatry Date: 2020-03-31 Impact factor: 4.157