Evidence mapPaperPMID 37815828Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2023

Diagnostic Criteria for Identifying Individuals at High Risk of Progression From Mild or Moderate to Severe Alcohol Use Disorder.

Alex P Miller, Sally I-Chun Kuo, Emma C Johnson, Rebecca Tillman, Sarah J Brislin, Danielle M Dick, Chella Kamarajan, Sivan Kinreich, John Kramer, Vivia V McCutcheon and 9 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Assessing measurement bias in substance use disorder criteria associated with childhood adversity and genetic liability.Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Generalized genetic liability to substance use disorders.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2024
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors.

Alex P MillerDepartment of Psychiatry, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri.
Sally I-Chun KuoDepartment of Psychiatry, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Piscataway, New Jersey.
Emma C JohnsonDepartment of Psychiatry, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri.
Rebecca TillmanDepartment of Psychiatry, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri.
Sarah J BrislinDepartment of Psychiatry, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Piscataway, New Jersey.
Danielle M DickDepartment of Psychiatry, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Piscataway, New Jersey.
Chella KamarajanDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, State University of New York Health Sciences University, Brooklyn.
Sivan KinreichDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, State University of New York Health Sciences University, Brooklyn.
John KramerDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Iowa, Iowa City.
Vivia V McCutcheonDepartment of Psychiatry, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri.
Martin H PlaweckiDepartment of Psychiatry, Indiana University, Indianapolis.
Bernice PorjeszDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, State University of New York Health Sciences University, Brooklyn.
Marc A SchuckitDepartment of Psychiatry, University of California San Diego Medical School, San Diego.
Jessica E SalvatoreDepartment of Psychiatry, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Piscataway, New Jersey.
Howard J EdenbergDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Indiana University, Indianapolis.
Kathleen K BucholzDepartment of Psychiatry, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri.
Jaquelyn L MeyersDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, State University of New York Health Sciences University, Brooklyn.
Arpana AgrawalDepartment of Psychiatry, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri.
Collaborative Study on the Genetics of Alcoholism (COGA)

Funding

Lifespan ProjectU10AA008401 · SUNY DOWNSTATE MEDICAL CENTER · 1989 to 2025
$18.1M
Transdisciplinary Training in Addictions ResearchT32DA015035 · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · 2002 to 2025
$1.0M
Neural, genetic, and environmental indicators of treatment outcomes for adolescent substance useK23DA058808 · RUTGERS BIOMEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES · 2025 to 2025
$177k
NIAAA NIH HHS U10 AA008401NIDA NIH HHS K23 DA058808NIDA NIH HHS T32 DA015035
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Current Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fifth Edition) (DSM-5) diagnoses of substance use disorders rely on criterion count-based approaches, disregarding severity grading indexed by individual criteria. Objective: To examine correlates of alcohol use disorder (AUD) across count-based severity groups (ie, mild, moderate, mild-to-moderate, severe), identify specific diagnostic criteria indicative of greater severity, and evaluate whether specific criteria within mild-to-moderate AUD differentiate across relevant correlates and manifest in greater hazards of severe AUD development. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study involved 2 cohorts from the family-based Collaborative Study on the Genetics of Alcoholism (COGA) with 7 sites across the United States: cross-sectional (assessed 1991-2005) and longitudinal (assessed 2004-2019). Statistical analyses were conducted from December 2022 to June 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Sociodemographic, alcohol-related, psychiatric comorbidity, brain electroencephalography (EEG), and AUD polygenic score measures as correlates of DSM-5 AUD levels (ie, mild, moderate, severe) and criterion severity-defined mild-to-moderate AUD diagnostic groups (ie, low-risk vs high-risk mild-to-moderate). Results: A total of 13 110 individuals from the cross-sectional COGA cohort (mean [SD] age, 37.8 [14.2] years) and 2818 individuals from the longitudinal COGA cohort (mean baseline [SD] age, 16.1 [3.2] years) were included. Associations with alcohol-related, psychiatric, EEG, and AUD polygenic score measures reinforced the role of increasing criterion counts as indexing severity. Yet within mild-to-moderate AUD (2-5 criteria), the presence of specific high-risk criteria (eg, withdrawal) identified a group reporting heavier drinking and greater psychiatric comorbidity even after accounting for criterion count differences. In longitudinal analyses, prior mild-to-moderate AUD characterized by endorsement of at least 1 high-risk criterion was associated with more accelerated progression to severe AUD (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 11.62; 95% CI, 7.54-17.92) compared with prior mild-to-moderate AUD without endorsement of high-risk criteria (aHR, 5.64; 95% CI, 3.28-9.70), independent of criterion count. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of a combined 15 928 individuals, findings suggested that simple count-based AUD diagnostic approaches to estimating severe AUD vulnerability, which ignore heterogeneity among criteria, may be improved by emphasizing specific high-risk criteria. Such emphasis may allow better focus on individuals at the greatest risk and improve understanding of the development of AUD.

Indexed as

AlcoholismAdolescentAdultAlcohol DrinkingCohort StudiesCross-Sectional StudiesEthanolHumansPrevalenceUnited StatesEthanol

Identifiers

PMID37815828
PMCPMC10565602

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.