Aims

To support the free and open dissemination of research findings and information on alcoholism and alcohol-related problems. To encourage open access to peer-reviewed articles free for all to view.

For full versions of posted research articles readers are encouraged to email requests for "electronic reprints" (text file, PDF files, FAX copies) to the corresponding or lead author, who is highlighted in the posting.

___________________________________________

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Assessing the Dimensionality of Lifetime DSM-IV Alcohol Use Disorders and a Quantity–Frequency Alcohol use Criterion in the Australian Population: a Factor Mixture Modelling Approach



With the revision of the DSM-IV underway, two important research issues currently dominate the addiction literature: (a) how can the dimensionality of DSM-IV alcohol use disorders (AUD) diagnostic criteria best be described? and (ii) should a quantity–frequency alcohol use (QF) criterion be added to the existing diagnostic criteria set in the DSM-V? The current study addressed these aims by analysing lifetime data from a recent Australian population survey. 

Data from adults screened for lifetime DSM-IV AUD in the 2007 National Survey on Mental Health and Wellbeing (NSMHWB) were analysed (n = 5409). A series of alternative factor analytic, latent class and factor mixture or ‘hybrid’ models were used to assess the dimensionality of lifetime DSM-IV AUD diagnostic criteria and a lifetime QF criterion.
Examination of the goodness-of-fit indices revealed that a one-factor or a two-factor model, a three-class latent class model or a two-factor zero-class hybrid model, were all acceptable models for the data. A simple structure one-factor model was considered to be the most parsimonious and theoretically meaningful model, given the high correlation between the abuse and dependence factors (0.874) in the two-factor model. The inclusion of the QF criterion did not enhance the fit of the one-factor model.
Incorporating both dimensional and categorical conceptions of lifetime AUD did not provide substantial gains over a simple structure unidimensional model of AUD severity. The utility of a QF use criterion in helping to diagnose AUD is questionable. These findings should be of relevance to the DSM-5 substance use disorder workgroup. 

Request Reprint E-Mail: orlamcbride@rcsi.ie