Assessing measurement bias in substance use disorder criteria associated with childhood adversity and genetic liability.

IF 2.8 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Psychology of Addictive Behaviors Pub Date : 2026-08-01 Epub Date: 2026-03-05 DOI:10.1037/adb0001139
Christal N Davis, Jackson SooHoo, Angela Han, Joel Gelernter, Richard Feinn, Henry R Kranzler
{"title":"Assessing measurement bias in substance use disorder criteria associated with childhood adversity and genetic liability.","authors":"Christal N Davis, Jackson SooHoo, Angela Han, Joel Gelernter, Richard Feinn, Henry R Kranzler","doi":"10.1037/adb0001139","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The diagnosis and severity of substance use disorders (SUDs) are classified by the number of criteria endorsed. However, environmental and genetic factors may influence criterion endorsement. To evaluate this, we tested for differential item functioning of SUDs criteria by adverse childhood events (ACEs) and SUD polygenic scores.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>In 10,275 Yale-Penn participants (<i>M</i><sub>age</sub> = 40.59 years, 56.2% male, 47.21% of African-like genetic ancestry, 52.79% of European-like genetic ancestry), we used item response theory models to estimate difficulty and discrimination parameters for each criterion for alcohol, cannabis, and opioid use disorders. We then tested whether these properties varied based on scores on a latent ACEs factor and ancestry-specific polygenic scores using moderated nonlinear factor analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was variability in the difficulty and discrimination of SUD criteria. Many criteria discriminated less effectively among individuals with higher ACEs factor scores. Continued substance use despite physical/psychological problems (β = .08, <i>SE</i> = 0.01, <i>p</i> < .0001) and withdrawal (β = .07, <i>SE</i> = 0.02, <i>p</i> = .001) were more difficult to endorse for individuals with high ACEs scores than those with lower ACEs scores. No differential item functioning was identified by polygenic scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Findings highlight the impact of ACEs on SUD assessment. Considering the relative weighting of criteria or developing screening procedures that consider subgroup-specific differences in symptom functioning may help address these biases. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48325,"journal":{"name":"Psychology of Addictive Behaviors","volume":" ","pages":"503-512"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12970586/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology of Addictive Behaviors","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/adb0001139","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The diagnosis and severity of substance use disorders (SUDs) are classified by the number of criteria endorsed. However, environmental and genetic factors may influence criterion endorsement. To evaluate this, we tested for differential item functioning of SUDs criteria by adverse childhood events (ACEs) and SUD polygenic scores.

Method: In 10,275 Yale-Penn participants (Mage = 40.59 years, 56.2% male, 47.21% of African-like genetic ancestry, 52.79% of European-like genetic ancestry), we used item response theory models to estimate difficulty and discrimination parameters for each criterion for alcohol, cannabis, and opioid use disorders. We then tested whether these properties varied based on scores on a latent ACEs factor and ancestry-specific polygenic scores using moderated nonlinear factor analyses.

Results: There was variability in the difficulty and discrimination of SUD criteria. Many criteria discriminated less effectively among individuals with higher ACEs factor scores. Continued substance use despite physical/psychological problems (β = .08, SE = 0.01, p < .0001) and withdrawal (β = .07, SE = 0.02, p = .001) were more difficult to endorse for individuals with high ACEs scores than those with lower ACEs scores. No differential item functioning was identified by polygenic scores.

Conclusions: Findings highlight the impact of ACEs on SUD assessment. Considering the relative weighting of criteria or developing screening procedures that consider subgroup-specific differences in symptom functioning may help address these biases. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

评估与童年逆境和遗传倾向相关的物质使用障碍标准的测量偏差。
目的:对物质使用障碍(sud)的诊断和严重程度进行分类。然而,环境和遗传因素可能会影响标准的认可。为了评估这一点,我们通过不良童年事件(ace)和SUD多基因评分测试了SUD标准的差异项目功能。方法:在10,275名耶鲁-宾夕法尼亚大学的参与者中(年龄40.59岁,56.2%为男性,47.21%为非洲裔遗传祖先,52.79%为欧洲裔遗传祖先),我们使用项目反应理论模型来估计酒精、大麻和阿片类药物使用障碍的每个标准的难度和区分参数。然后,我们使用有调节的非线性因素分析测试了这些特性是否基于潜在ace因素的得分和祖先特异性多基因得分而变化。结果:SUD标准的难易程度和辨别性存在差异。许多标准在ace因素得分较高的个体之间的歧视效果较差。尽管存在身体/心理问题(β = 0.08, SE = 0.01, p < 0.0001),但持续的药物使用和戒断(β = 0.07, SE = 0.02, p = .001)在ace得分高的个体中比在ace得分低的个体更难以得到认可。多基因评分未发现差异项目功能。结论:研究结果强调了ace对SUD评估的影响。考虑标准的相对权重或制定考虑亚组特异性症状功能差异的筛选程序可能有助于解决这些偏见。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c) 2026 APA,版权所有)。
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
4.90
自引率
11.80%
发文量
165
期刊介绍: Psychology of Addictive Behaviors publishes peer-reviewed original articles related to the psychological aspects of addictive behaviors. The journal includes articles on the following topics: - alcohol and alcoholism - drug use and abuse - eating disorders - smoking and nicotine addiction, and other excessive behaviors (e.g., gambling) Full-length research reports, literature reviews, brief reports, and comments are published.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书