Literature DB >> 30777336

Toward more efficient diagnostic criteria sets and rules: The use of optimization approaches in addiction science.

Jordan E Stevens1, Douglas Steinley2, Yoanna E McDowell2, Cassandra L Boness2, Timothy J Trull2, Christopher S Martin3, Kenneth J Sher2.   

Abstract

Psychiatric diagnostic systems, such as The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), use expert consensus to determine diagnostic criteria sets and rules (DCSRs), rather than exploiting empirical techniques to arrive at optimal solutions (OS). Our project utilizes complete enumeration (i.e., generating all possible subsets of item combinations A and B with all possible thresholds, T) to evaluate all possible DCSRs given a set of relevant diagnostic data. This method yields the entire population distribution of diagnostic classifications (i.e., diagnosis of the disorder versus no diagnosis) produced by a set of dichotomous predictors (i.e., diagnostic criteria). Once unique sets are enumerated, optimization on some predefined correlate or predictor will maximally separate diagnostic groups on one or more, disorder-specific "outcome" criteria. We used this approach to illustrate how to create a common Substance Use Disorder (SUD) DCSR that is applicable to multiple substances. We demonstrate the utility of this approach with respect to alcohol use disorder and Cannabis Use Disorder (CUD) using DSM-5 criteria as input variables. The optimal SUD solution with a moderate or above severity grading included four criteria (i.e. 1) having a strong urge or craving for the substance (CR), 2) failure to fulfill major role obligations at work school or home (FF), 3) continued use of the substance despite social or interpersonal problems caused by the substance use (SI) and 4) physically hazardous use (HU)) with a diagnostic threshold of two. The derived DCSR was validated with known correlates of SUD and performed as well as DSM-5. Our findings illustrate the value of using an empirical approach to what is typically a subjective process of choosing criteria and algorithms that is prone to bias. The optimization of diagnostic criteria can reduce criteria set sizes, resulting in decreased research, clinician, and patient burden.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Alcohol Use Disorder; Cannabis Use Disorder; Classification; Diagnosis; Optimization; Substance Use Disorder

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30777336      PMCID: PMC6544486          DOI: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2019.02.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Addict Behav        ISSN: 0306-4603            Impact factor:   3.913


  32 in total

1.  The neuroscience of addiction.

Authors:  Nora Volkow; Ting-Kai Li
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 24.884

2.  Understanding interobserver agreement: the kappa statistic.

Authors:  Anthony J Viera; Joanne M Garrett
Journal:  Fam Med       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 1.756

3.  Sensitivity analysis of kappa-fold cross validation in prediction error estimation.

Authors:  Juan Diego Rodríguez; Aritz Pérez; Jose Antonio Lozano
Journal:  IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 6.226

4.  Hazardous use should not be a diagnostic criterion for substance use disorders in DSM-5.

Authors:  Christopher S Martin; Kenneth J Sher; Tammy Chung
Journal:  J Stud Alcohol Drugs       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 2.582

Review 5.  DSM-5 criteria for substance use disorders: recommendations and rationale.

Authors:  Deborah S Hasin; Charles P O'Brien; Marc Auriacombe; Guilherme Borges; Kathleen Bucholz; Alan Budney; Wilson M Compton; Thomas Crowley; Walter Ling; Nancy M Petry; Marc Schuckit; Bridget F Grant
Journal:  Am J Psychiatry       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 18.112

6.  Gender differences in alcohol consumption and adverse drinking consequences: cross-cultural patterns.

Authors:  R W Wilsnack; N D Vogeltanz; S C Wilsnack; T R Harris; S Ahlström; S Bondy; L Csémy; R Ferrence; J Ferris; J Fleming; K Graham; T Greenfield; L Guyon; E Haavio-Mannila; F Kellner; R Knibbe; L Kubicka; M Loukomskaia; H Mustonen; L Nadeau; A Narusk; R Neve; G Rahav; F Spak; M Teichman; K Trocki; I Webster; S Weiss
Journal:  Addiction       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 6.526

Review 7.  Reduction of drinking in problem drinkers and all-cause mortality.

Authors:  J Rehm; M Roerecke
Journal:  Alcohol Alcohol       Date:  2013-03-26       Impact factor: 2.826

8.  A multidimensional assessment of the validity and utility of alcohol use disorder severity as determined by item response theory models.

Authors:  Deborah A Dawson; Tulshi D Saha; Bridget F Grant
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2009-09-25       Impact factor: 4.492

9.  The Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule-IV (AUDADIS-IV): reliability of alcohol consumption, tobacco use, family history of depression and psychiatric diagnostic modules in a general population sample.

Authors:  Bridget F Grant; Deborah A Dawson; Frederick S Stinson; Patricia S Chou; Ward Kay; Roger Pickering
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2003-07-20       Impact factor: 4.492

10.  What Is Addiction? How Can Animal and Human Research Be Used to Advance Research, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Alcohol and Other Substance Use Disorders?

Authors:  Warren K Bickel; John C Crabbe; Kenneth J Sher
Journal:  Alcohol Clin Exp Res       Date:  2018-12-03       Impact factor: 3.455

View more
  1 in total

1.  Using Complete Enumeration to Derive "One-Size-Fits-All" Versus "Subgroup-Specific" Diagnostic Rules for Substance Use Disorder.

Authors:  Cassandra L Boness; Jordan E Loeffelman; Douglas Steinley; Timothy Trull; Kenneth J Sher
Journal:  Assessment       Date:  2020-02-10
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.