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

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.

[1]  John H. Holland,et al.  Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems: An Introductory Analysis with Applications to Biology, Control, and Artificial Intelligence , 1992 .

[2]  B. Grant,et al.  The National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC) Waves 1 and 2: review and summary of findings , 2015, Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology.

[3]  G Pozzato,et al.  Gender differences in pharmacokinetics of alcohol. , 2001, Alcoholism, clinical and experimental research.

[4]  Lawrence Hubert,et al.  The variance of the adjusted Rand index. , 2016, Psychological methods.

[5]  N. Volkow,et al.  The neuroscience of addiction , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.

[6]  J Rehm,et al.  Reduction of drinking in problem drinkers and all-cause mortality. , 2013, Alcohol and alcoholism.

[7]  H. Thomasson,et al.  Gender differences in alcohol metabolism. Physiological responses to ethanol. , 1995, Recent developments in alcoholism : an official publication of the American Medical Society on Alcoholism, the Research Society on Alcoholism, and the National Council on Alcoholism.

[8]  Kenneth J Sher,et al.  Limits of Current Approaches to Diagnosis Severity Based on Criterion Counts , 2015, Clinical psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[9]  G Gmel,et al.  Defining substance use disorders: do we really need more than heavy use? , 2013, Alcohol and alcoholism.

[10]  W. Bickel,et al.  What Is Addiction? How Can Animal and Human Research Be Used to Advance Research, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Alcohol and Other Substance Use Disorders? , 2018, Alcoholism, clinical and experimental research.

[11]  M. P. Vecchi,et al.  Optimization by Simulated Annealing , 1983, Science.

[12]  Nicholas G. Martin,et al.  Alcohol Consumption Indices of Genetic Risk for Alcohol Dependence , 2009, Biological Psychiatry.

[13]  A. Budney.  Are specific dependence criteria necessary for different substances: how can research on cannabis inform this issue? , 2006, Addiction.

[14]  J. Wakefield,et al.  DSM‐5 substance use disorder: how conceptual missteps weakened the foundations of the addictive disorders field , 2015, Acta psychiatrica Scandinavica.

[15]  Fred W. Glover,et al.  Future paths for integer programming and links to artificial intelligence , 1986, Comput. Oper. Res..

[16]  Kenneth J Sher,et al.  Hazardous use should not be a diagnostic criterion for substance use disorders in DSM-5. , 2011, Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs.

[17]  T. Widiger,et al.  Psychiatric diagnosis: lessons from the DSM-IV past and cautions for the DSM-5 future. , 2012, Annual review of clinical psychology.

[18]  A general theory of transition to addiction it was and a general theory of transition to addiction it is , 2014, Psychopharmacology.

[19]  Janet B W Williams.  Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders , 2013 .

[20]  D. Watson.  Objective tests as instruments of psychological theory and research. , 2012 .

[21]  J. Welte,et al.  Gender comparisons of alcohol consumption in alcoholic and nonalcoholic populations. , 1994, Journal of studies on alcohol.

[22]  Kenneth J Sher,et al.  The proposed 2/11 symptom algorithm for DSM-5 substance-use disorders is too lenient. , 2011, Psychological medicine.

[23]  Sean P. Lane,et al.  Determining optimal diagnostic criteria through chronicity and comorbidity , 2016, In Silico Pharmacology.

[24]  José Antonio Lozano,et al.  Sensitivity Analysis of k-Fold Cross Validation in Prediction Error Estimation , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[25]  Timothy Trull,et al.  Deriving alternative criteria sets for alcohol use disorders using statistical optimization: Results from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health. , 2019, Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology.

[26]  K. Bucholz,et al.  DSM-5 criteria for substance use disorders: recommendations and rationale. , 2013, The American journal of psychiatry.

[27]  A. Viera,et al.  Understanding interobserver agreement: the kappa statistic. , 2005, Family medicine.

[28]  Kenneth J Sher,et al.  Truth or consequences in the diagnosis of substance use disorders. , 2014, Addiction.

[29]  Tammy Chung,et al.  How should we revise diagnostic criteria for substance use disorders in the DSM-V? , 2008, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[30]  B. Grant,et al.  A multidimensional assessment of the validity and utility of alcohol use disorder severity as determined by item response theory models. , 2010, Drug and alcohol dependence.

[31]  M. Stone.  Cross‐Validatory Choice and Assessment of Statistical Predictions , 1976 .

[32]  B. Grant,et al.  Epidemiology of DSM-5 Alcohol Use Disorder: Results From the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions III. , 2015, JAMA psychiatry.

[33]  K. Berridge,et al.  Liking, wanting, and the incentive-sensitization theory of addiction. , 2016, The American psychologist.

[34]  B. Grant,et al.  The role of cannabis use within a dimensional approach to cannabis use disorders. , 2009, Drug and alcohol dependence.

[35]  John von Neumann,et al.  Theory Of Self Reproducing Automata , 1967 .

[36]  L Nadeau,et al.  Gender differences in alcohol consumption and adverse drinking consequences: cross-cultural patterns. , 2000, Addiction.

[37]  B. Grant,et al.  The role of alcohol consumption in future classifications of alcohol use disorders. , 2007, Drug and alcohol dependence.

[38]  C. Duff,et al.  A ‘standard joint’? The role of quantity in predicting cannabis-related problems , 2012 .

[39]  B. Grant,et al.  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. , 2003, Drug and alcohol dependence.

[40]  Paul Appelbaum,et al.  A data-driven method for identifying shorter symptom criteria sets: the case for DSM-5 alcohol use disorder , 2018, Psychological Medicine.