Slower Learning Rates from Negative Outcomes in Substance Use Disorder over a 1-Year Period and Their Potential Predictive Utility.

Computational psychiatry (Cambridge, Mass.) Pub Date : 2022-06-08 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI:10.5334/cpsy.85
Ryan Smith, Samuel Taylor, Jennifer L Stewart, Salvador M Guinjoan, Maria Ironside, Namik Kirlic, Hamed Ekhtiari, Evan J White, Haixia Zheng, Rayus Kuplicki, Martin P Paulus
{"title":"Slower Learning Rates from Negative Outcomes in Substance Use Disorder over a 1-Year Period and Their Potential Predictive Utility.","authors":"Ryan Smith, Samuel Taylor, Jennifer L Stewart, Salvador M Guinjoan, Maria Ironside, Namik Kirlic, Hamed Ekhtiari, Evan J White, Haixia Zheng, Rayus Kuplicki, Martin P Paulus","doi":"10.5334/cpsy.85","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Computational modelling is a promising approach to parse dysfunctional cognitive processes in substance use disorders (SUDs), but it is unclear how much these processes change during the recovery period. We assessed 1-year follow-up data on a sample of treatment-seeking individuals with one or more SUDs (alcohol, cannabis, sedatives, stimulants, hallucinogens, and/or opioids; <i>N</i> = 83) that were previously assessed at baseline within a prior computational modelling study. Relative to healthy controls (HCs; <i>N</i> = 48), these participants were found at baseline to show altered learning rates and less precise action selection while completing an explore-exploit decision-making task. Here we replicated these analyses when these individuals returned and re-performed the task 1 year later to assess the stability of baseline differences. We also examined whether baseline modelling measures could predict symptoms at follow-up. Bayesian and frequentist analyses indicated that: (a) group differences in learning rates were stable over time (posterior probability = 1); and (b) intra-class correlations (ICCs) between model parameters at baseline and follow-up were significant and ranged from small to moderate (.25 ≤ ICCs ≤ .54). Exploratory analyses also suggested that learning rates and/or information-seeking values at baseline were associated with substance use severity at 1-year follow-up in stimulant and opioid users (.36 ≤ <i>r</i>s ≤ .43). These findings suggest that learning dysfunctions are moderately stable during recovery and could correspond to trait-like vulnerability factors. In addition, computational measures at baseline had some predictive value for changes in substance use severity over time and could be clinically informative.</p>","PeriodicalId":72664,"journal":{"name":"Computational psychiatry (Cambridge, Mass.)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11104312/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computational psychiatry (Cambridge, Mass.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/cpsy.85","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Computational modelling is a promising approach to parse dysfunctional cognitive processes in substance use disorders (SUDs), but it is unclear how much these processes change during the recovery period. We assessed 1-year follow-up data on a sample of treatment-seeking individuals with one or more SUDs (alcohol, cannabis, sedatives, stimulants, hallucinogens, and/or opioids; N = 83) that were previously assessed at baseline within a prior computational modelling study. Relative to healthy controls (HCs; N = 48), these participants were found at baseline to show altered learning rates and less precise action selection while completing an explore-exploit decision-making task. Here we replicated these analyses when these individuals returned and re-performed the task 1 year later to assess the stability of baseline differences. We also examined whether baseline modelling measures could predict symptoms at follow-up. Bayesian and frequentist analyses indicated that: (a) group differences in learning rates were stable over time (posterior probability = 1); and (b) intra-class correlations (ICCs) between model parameters at baseline and follow-up were significant and ranged from small to moderate (.25 ≤ ICCs ≤ .54). Exploratory analyses also suggested that learning rates and/or information-seeking values at baseline were associated with substance use severity at 1-year follow-up in stimulant and opioid users (.36 ≤ rs ≤ .43). These findings suggest that learning dysfunctions are moderately stable during recovery and could correspond to trait-like vulnerability factors. In addition, computational measures at baseline had some predictive value for changes in substance use severity over time and could be clinically informative.

药物使用失调症患者在一年内从负面结果中学习的较慢速度及其潜在的预测作用。
计算建模是解析药物使用障碍(SUDs)中功能障碍认知过程的一种很有前途的方法,但目前还不清楚这些过程在康复期间会发生多大变化。我们对患有一种或多种药物使用障碍(酒精、大麻、镇静剂、兴奋剂、致幻剂和/或阿片类药物;N = 83)的寻求治疗者样本进行了为期一年的随访数据评估,这些样本在之前的计算建模研究中接受过基线评估。与健康对照组(HCs;N = 48)相比,我们发现这些参与者在完成 "探索-发现 "决策任务时,学习速度和行动选择的精确性都有所改变。在此,我们在这些人一年后返回并重新执行任务时重复了这些分析,以评估基线差异的稳定性。我们还研究了基线模型测量是否能预测随访时的症状。贝叶斯和频数分析表明(a) 随着时间的推移,学习率的群体差异是稳定的(后验概率 = 1);(b) 基线和随访时模型参数之间的类内相关性(ICCs)是显著的,从较小到中等不等(.25 ≤ ICCs ≤ .54)。探索性分析还表明,在兴奋剂和阿片类药物使用者中,基线时的学习率和/或信息搜寻值与1年随访时的药物使用严重程度相关(.36 ≤ rs ≤ .43)。这些研究结果表明,学习功能障碍在康复期间具有一定的稳定性,可能与特质类脆弱性因素相对应。此外,基线计算测量对药物使用严重程度随时间的变化具有一定的预测价值,可能对临床具有参考价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
17 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信