Elsevier

Drug and Alcohol Dependence

Volume 161, 1 April 2016, Pages 230-237
Drug and Alcohol Dependence

Full length article
Network analysis of substance abuse and dependence symptoms

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2016.02.005Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Abuse and dependence symptoms are modeled as directly interacting variables in a network.

  • Network analysis reveals pairwise symptom interactions that traditional analyses obscure.

  • Abuse and dependence symptoms do not function equivalently across 6 illicit substance classes.

Abstract

Background

The DSM uses one set of abuse and dependence criteria to assess multiple substance use disorders (SUDs). Most SUD research aggregates across these symptoms to study the behavior of SUD as a static construct. We use an alternative approach that conceptualizes symptoms as directly interacting variables in psychopathological networks. We apply network models to symptom-level data to investigate the unique roles of individual symptoms and their interactions in SUD.

Methods

We analyzed 11 DSM III-R/IV abuse and dependence criteria in a sample of 2405 adult twins who reported use of at least one illicit substance six or more times from the Virginia Adult Twin Study of Psychiatric and Substance Use Disorders (VATSPSUD). We estimated a symptom network for each substance class as well as a global network collapsed across all substance classes. We examined similarities and differences across the 6 networks in terms of symptom-to-symptom connections and symptom centrality.

Results

The global network model revealed several interesting symptom connections, such as a strong predictive relation between tolerance and more-than-planned substance use. The most central symptom was using a drug more than planned. In addition, several interesting differences across substances emerged, both in the strength of symptom connections as well as the centrality of symptoms to each network.

Conclusions

When analyzed as networks, abuse and dependence symptoms do not function equivalently across illicit substance classes. These findings suggest the value of analyzing individual symptoms and their associations to gain new insight into the mechanisms of SUD.

Introduction

Drug abuse and dependence is a common and increasing worldwide public health concern (World Health Organization, 2010). In the US, life-time prevalence estimates of substance use disorders (SUD) range from 2–3% for illicit substances to 8% for alcohol use, and 12-month rates of substance abuse or dependence increase from 7% to 20% during adolescence (Merikangas and McClair, 2012).

Recent research in psychopathology indicates that the analysis of individual symptoms can reveal crucial insights obfuscated by other analytic strategies (Fried and Nesse, 2015, Smeets et al., 2014). A central tenet of symptom-based approaches is that interactions among symptoms may be central to understanding how disorders arise, sustain themselves, and are cured (Borsboom and Cramer, 2013; Buu et al., 2012; Cullen et al., 2013; Fergus et al., 2015; Fried, 2015; Jacobsen et al., 2001). A useful way to examine such symptom-level effects is to apply a network model, which uses pairwise interactions among symptoms to represent a disorder as a web of mutually influencing symptoms (Borsboom and Cramer, 2013). These models have been successfully applied to a number of disorders such as posttraumatic stress disorder (McNally et al., 2015) and major depression (Fried et al., 2015).

The network framework is an appropriate and useful conceptual approach to analyzing data whenever relations among symptoms can be plausibly interpreted as interacting directly with each other. Similar to other disorders, there is evidence that SUD symptoms may arise in a causal sequence; for example, drinking more alcohol than planned is frequently the first symptom of alcohol use disorder to arise (Buu et al., 2012), which aligns with the finding that impaired control over alcohol use is an important predictor of problem drinking in adolescents (Leeman et al., 2012). To date, no research has investigated such symptom interactions. A network model of SUD can give an overview of the connection patterns among symptoms, revealing which symptoms are most closely related to each other, and which symptoms are most central to the disorder. In addition, network analyses allow us to compare networks across several substance classes, and to locate important differences in the symptom-to-symptom pathways that may exist due to distinct pharmacologic and psychological properties of the substance and/or different patterns of use (Degenhardt et al., 2001, Koob and Le Moal, 2006).

In the remainder of the paper, we present and interpret three cross-sectional network analyses of substance abuse and dependence symptoms. First, we examine a psychopathological network of symptom data averaged over 6 illicit substance classes (cannabis, sedatives, stimulants, cocaine, opioids, and hallucinogens) in 2,405 individuals. We investigate the pairwise connections among 11 symptoms, and estimate measures of symptom centrality to identify which symptoms may be most important in the maladaptive behavior patterns of SUD. Second, we compute symptom networks for each of the substance classes separately. Our aim here is to explore the important differences and similarities of substance classes based on a network representation, and what these differences can tell us about the interconnectivity patterns of SUD symptoms. Finally, we estimate the variance of symptom-to-symptom connections across substance classes (i.e., how much does the strength of the association between symptom pairs vary across the six classes) to identify which of these connections vary most widely across substances.

Section snippets

Sample

Data for the analyses carried out in this study come from twins who participated in the Virginia Adult Twin Study of Psychiatric and Substance Use Disorders (VATSPSUD). Initial eligibility was determined through successful matching of birth records, if twin members were Caucasian and born between 1940 and 1974 in Virginia, USA. Detailed information about substance use and related behaviors were obtained for 2 data collection samples. Female–female twins participating in the third follow-up

Demographics

2,405 participants were included in the final sample. Of these, all were Caucasian, 35% were female, and the average age was 34.7 (SD = 7.3, range = 20–57). 58% of participants used a single substance class, while 20% used two substance classes, 9% three, 5% four, 4% five, and 3% all six.

Cross-substance network

Fig. 1 depicts the results of the global SUD network. Each node in the network depicts a symptom, and each edge represents bidirectional partial relations between symptoms, controlling for all other associations in

Discussion

Most research on SUD uses aggregated symptom-level data: symptom scores are transformed into a diagnostic category, a sum-score (e.g., Grant et al., 2015), or a latent variable (e.g., Gillespie et al., 2007). But theorists and clinicians also recognize that there are important differences among individual symptoms; symptoms may behave differently, they may be indicative of different developmental stages of a disorder, and they may have direct effects on other symptoms, leading a disordered

Funding source

This work was supported by the European Research Council (MR; FP7/2007-2013 no. 631145, and DB; consolidator grant no. 647209), the Research Foundation Flanders (EIF; G.0806.13), the Belgian Federal Science Policy within the framework of the Interuniversity Attraction Poles program (EIF; IAP/P7/06), a grant from the University of Leuven (EIF; GOA/15/003), and the National Institutes of Health (KSK; grants RO1DA037558 and R01DA03005).

Contributors

Mijke Rhemtulla, Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Eiko I. Fried, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Leuven, Belgium

Steven H. Aggen, Virginia Institute for Psychiatric and Behavioral Genetics, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA; Department of Psychiatry, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA

Francis Tuerlinckx, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Leuven, Belgium

Kenneth S. Kendler,

Conflict of interest

None.

Acknowledgements

We would like to express our gratitude to all participants of the Virginia Adult Twin Study of Psychiatric and Substance Use Disorders study.

References (30)

  • S. Boccaletti et al.

    Complex networks: structure and dynamics

    Phys. Rep.

    (2006)
  • B.F. Grant et al.

    The alcohol use disorder and associated disabilities interview schedule-5 (AUDADIS-5): reliability of substance use and psychiatric disorder modules in a general population sample

    Drug Alcohol Depend.

    (2015)
  • R.P. Bentall et al.

    From adversity to psychosis: pathways and mechanisms from specific adversities to specific symptoms

    Social Psychiatry Psychiatr. Epidemiol.

    (2014)
  • D. Borsboom et al.

    Network analysis: an integrative approach to the structure of psychopathology

    Annu. Rev. Clin. Psychol.

    (2013)
  • A. Buu et al.

    Developmental emergence of alcohol use disorder symptoms and their potential as early indicators for progression to alcohol dependence in a high risk sample: a longitudinal study from childhood to early adulthood

    J. Abnorm. Psychol.

    (2012)
  • M. Coltheart et al.

    Delusional belief

    Annu. Rev. Psychol.

    (2011)
  • B.A. Cullen et al.

    Association of comorbid generalized anxiety disorder and alcohol use disorder symptoms with health-related quality of life: results from the national epidemiological survey on alcohol and related conditions

    J. Addict. Med.

    (2013)
  • L. Degenhardt et al.

    Alcohol, cannabis and tobacco use among Australians: a comparison of their associations with other drug use and use disorders, affective and anxiety disorders, and psychosis

    Addiction

    (2001)
  • J.R. DiFranza et al.

    Development of symptoms of tobacco dependence in youths: 30 month follow up data from the DANDY study

    Tob. Control

    (2002)
  • S. Epskamp et al.

    qgraph: network visualizations of relationships in psychometric data

    J. Stat. Softw.

    (2012)
  • T.A. Fergus et al.

    Examining the symptom-level specificity of negative problem orientation in a clinical sample

    Cogn. Behav. Ther.

    (2015)
  • E.I. Fried

    Problematic assumptions have slowed down depression research: why symptoms, not syndromes are the way forward

    Front. Psychol.

    (2015)
  • E.I. Fried et al.

    From loss to loneliness: the relationship between bereavement and depressive symptoms

    J. Abnorm. Psychol.

    (2015)
  • E.I. Fried et al.

    Depression sum-scores do not add up: why analyzing specific depression symptoms is essential

    BMC Med.

    (2015)
  • N.A. Gillespie et al.

    Factor and item-response analysis DSM-IV criteria for abuse of and dependence on cannabis, cocaine, hallucinogens, sedatives, stimulants and opioids

    Addiction

    (2007)
  • Cited by (147)

    • Risky alcohol use during youth: Impact on emotion, cognitive networks, and resting-state EEG activity

      2024, Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry
    • Gender differences in cannabis use disorder symptoms: A network analysis

      2023, Drug and Alcohol Dependence
      Citation Excerpt :

      However, exploratory analyses assessing the association of comorbid mental health problems with CUD symptoms did reveal gender differences; while the presence of anxiety and mood disorders were associated with each other in both men and women, the way they connected to the CUD symptom network was different. The estimated CUD symptom network was dense, in line with a previous study assessing the DSM-IV CUD symptom network (Rhemtulla et al., 2016), and consistent between men and women. This density might theoretically affect the developmental trajectory of CUD; in denser networks, when one symptom occurs (e.g., craving) the pathology can more easily spread (i.e., other symptoms develop) through the network because the initial symptom is connected to many other symptoms (e.g. Borsboom and Cramer, 2013).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    1

    Both the authors contributed equally to this work.

    View full text