Search

The Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study® is a 10-year longitudinal study of children recruited at ages 9 and 10. A battery of neuroimaging tasks are administered biennially to track neurodevelopment and identify individual differences in brain function. This study reports activation patterns from functional MRI (fMRI) tasks completed at baseline, which were designed to measure cognitive impulse control with a stop signal task (SST; N = 5,547), reward anticipation and receipt with a monetary incentive delay (MID) task (N = 6,657) and working memory and emotion reactivity with an emotional N-back (EN-back) task (N = 6,009). Further, we report the spatial reproducibility of activation patterns by assessing between-group vertex/voxelwise correlations of blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) activation. Analyses reveal robust brain activations that are consistent with the published literature, vary across fMRI tasks/contrasts and slightly correlate with individual behavioral performance on the tasks. These results establish the preadolescent brain function baseline, guide interpretation of cross-sectional analyses and will enable the investigation of longitudinal changes during adolescent development. This paper reports activation patterns for fMRI tasks assessing response inhibition, working memory and reward processing obtained at baseline in the longitudinal ABCD Study, providing a reference for research into adolescent brain development.

Epidemiologic research serves as an important foundation for intervention research. In this way, it can contribute to vast improvements in public health. However, to fully capitalize on what is learned through epidemiology, collaborations must ensure the translation of epidemiologic findings into both treatment and prevention interventions. This commentary suggests some ways in which epidemiology can inform intervention research and how intervention research can be backtranslated so that epidemiological studies are designed to better inform intervention design. The commentary does this by using as examples the original contributions in this special section on the intergenerational transmission of cannabis use. These studies identify several ways in which epidemiology can inform intervention and discuss mechanisms of risk transmission from one generation to the next, such as parental monitoring, parent norms around substance use or parenting strategies, poor inhibitory control, or perceptions of harm from substance use. Targeting these mechanisms could be important for effective intervention. The papers further explore factors that might mitigate or amplify the association between parental and offspring use of cannabis, such as active coping or harsh parenting. Finally, to ensure bridging between substance abuse epidemiology and intervention research, this article considers research training practices. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Continued increases in overdose deaths and recent declines in life expectancy call for need to adopt comprehensive public health approaches to the United States opioid crisis and to establish an infrastructure to avert future crises. Successfully addressing the challenges posed by the crisis requires a translational, integrated approach that combines the contribution of neuroscience, pharmacology, epidemiology, treatment services and prevention. It also is critical to integrate interventions across settings, including healthcare, justice, education and social service systems. This review highlights four interconnected themes: (1) social determinants of health and disease; (2) person-centered approaches for prevention and treatment; (3) bridging the gap between implementation science and practice; and (4) using data to build learning systems of care, relevant to public health approaches to address the opioid crisis. We discuss how across these four themes taking into account the influence of developmental factors on brain function and sensitivity to environmental stimuli including drugs, addressing the complex interactions between biological and social factors, and promoting an ongoing dialogue across disciplines and settings will help accelerate public health advances that are evidenced based and sustainable to address the current opioid crisis and avert future ones.

Rates and patterns of transition from opioid analgesic to illicit opioid (ie, heroin) use is of great clinical significance. Exposure to opioid analgesics, and whether use is therapeutic or outside a doctor's orders, may have overlapping yet different patterns of transition to heroin use. Yet, this topic is rarely examined in longitudinal studies. With data from the landmark Monitoring the Future (MTF) study, McCabe and colleagues have now studied the transition from adolescent use of opioid analgesics (both medical and nonmedical) to heroin over a seventeen year follow up for adolescents first recruited from 1975 to 2000. Key findings include an overall association of both nonmedical and medical use of opioid analgesics with transition to heroin use, with particular concerns about early nonmedical use. Of note, more recent cohorts apparently have an increased risk of transition to heroin, suggesting a need for minimizing opioid prescribing and for screening of youth and young adults for prior nonmedical opioid analgesic use before prescribing opioids. New research is also suggested to address such questions as: What is the time course of exposure to the start of heroin use? How does the frequency and dosage of exposure matter? Continued analyses of MTF data, as well as exploration of other data are needed to address these and related compelling issues.

The purpose of this review was to examine the definition of cannabis use disorder (CUD) and recent findings regarding the risks for developing CUD and the associated outcomes. Frequent use of cannabis, use of other substances, and mental health disorders are associated with CUD. Although few individuals seek treatment, addressing CUD is associated with improved health outcomes and quality of life. Public health officials and policymakers need to be aware of the potential consequences of more permissive cannabis use policies and to take the appropriate intervention and prevention actions to improve overall health and social outcomes.

Rates and patterns of transition from opioid analgesic to illicit opioid (ie, heroin) use is of great clinical significance. Exposure to opioid analgesics, and whether use is therapeutic or outside a doctor's orders, may have overlapping yet different patterns of transition to heroin use. Yet, this topic is rarely examined in longitudinal studies. With data from the landmark Monitoring the Future (MTF) study, McCabe and colleagues have now studied the transition from adolescent use of opioid analgesics (both medical and nonmedical) to heroin over a seventeen year follow up for adolescents first recruited from 1975 to 2000. Key findings include an overall association of both nonmedical and medical use of opioid analgesics with transition to heroin use, with particular concerns about early nonmedical use. Of note, more recent cohorts apparently have an increased risk of transition to heroin, suggesting a need for minimizing opioid prescribing and for screening of youth and young adults for prior nonmedical opioid analgesic use before prescribing opioids. New research is also suggested to address such questions as: What is the time course of exposure to the start of heroin use? How does the frequency and dosage of exposure matter? Continued analyses of MTF data, as well as exploration of other data are needed to address these and related compelling issues.

The field of epidemiology provides information about the occurrence and distribution of cannabis use disorders (CUD) over the years, giving clinicians a greater understanding of who may be at increased or decreased risk of cannabis-related problems and why, with the ultimate goal of helping to help guide interventions to reduce public health burden. This chapter describes the goals of epidemiology, defines what constitutes cannabis use and disorder, and summarizes national CUD trends at a population level. Included are discussions of risk factors, subgroup differences, and comorbidity as integral components of a comprehensive picture of CUD, as well as a necessary and timely discussion of cannabis policy and how the continuing evolution of cannabis legislation across US states could impact cannabis use and disorder, and how we treat them, moving forward.

The Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study is an ongoing, nationwide study of the effects of environmental influences on behavioral and brain development in adolescents. The ABCD Study is a collaborative effort, including a Coordinating Center, 21 data acquisition sites across the United States, and a Data Analysis and Informatics Center (DAIC). The main objective of the study is to recruit and assess over eleven thousand 9-10-year-olds and follow them over the course of 10 years to characterize normative brain and cognitive development, the many factors that influence brain development, and the effects of those factors on mental health and other outcomes. The study employs state-of-the-art multimodal brain imaging, cognitive and clinical assessments, bioassays, and careful assessment of substance use, environment, psychopathological symptoms, and social functioning. The data will provide a resource of unprecedented scale and depth for studying typical and atypical development. Here, we describe the baseline neuroimaging processing and subject-level analysis methods used by the ABCD DAIC in the centralized processing and extraction of neuroanatomical and functional imaging phenotypes. Neuroimaging processing and analyses include modality-specific corrections for distortions and motion, brain segmentation and cortical surface reconstruction derived from structural magnetic resonance imaging (sMRI), analysis of brain microstructure using diffusion MRI (dMRI), task-related analysis of functional MRI (fMRI), and functional connectivity analysis of resting-state fMRI.HighlightsAn overview of the MRI processing pipeline for the ABCD StudyA discussion on the challenges of large, multisite population studiesA methodological reference for users of publicly shared data from the ABCD Study

The Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study is an ongoing, nationwide study of the effects of environmental influences on behavioral and brain development in adolescents. The main objective of the study is to recruit and assess over eleven thousand 9–10-year-olds and follow them over the course of 10 years to characterize normative brain and cognitive development, the many factors that influence brain development, and the effects of those factors on mental health and other outcomes. The study employs state-of-the-art multimodal brain imaging, cognitive and clinical assessments, bioassays, and careful assessment of substance use, environment, psychopathological symptoms, and social functioning. The data is a resource of unprecedented scale and depth for studying typical and atypical development. The aim of this manuscript is to describe the baseline neuroimaging processing and subject-level analysis methods used by ABCD. Processing and analyses include modality-specific corrections for distortions and motion, brain segmentation and cortical surface reconstruction derived from structural magnetic resonance imaging (sMRI), analysis of brain microstructure using diffusion MRI (dMRI), task-related analysis of functional MRI (fMRI), and functional connectivity analysis of resting-state fMRI. This manuscript serves as a methodological reference for users of publicly shared neuroimaging data from the ABCD Study.

Objectives. The purpose of this study was to examine the association between behavioral problems and tobacco use among adolescent students in six countries of Central America and in the Dominican Republic. Methods. Data were drawn from a multinational collaborative study that included questionnaire surveys of between 451 and 1 170 school-attending adolescents in each of the seven countries studied. Assessments were based on an adapted, Spanish-language version of the Drug Use Screening Inventory (DUSI). The conditional form of logistic regression was employed for analysis, matching students on type of school and area, with further statistical adjustments for sex, age, and selected risk factors. Results. Occurrence of tobacco use was observed to vary dramatically from country to country. Nonetheless, for the combined group of countries, the estimated odds of tobacco use in youths at the highest levels of behavioral problems was more than five times that for youths at the lowest levels, after controlling for sex, age, lack of participation in recreational activities, level of irritability, and levels of problems with school, family, and mental health. Country- specific analyses show that youths at the highest levels of behavioral problems have a consistently greater occurrence of tobacco use as compared to youths at the lowest levels of behavioral problems. Conclusions. These findings are concordant with prior studies on tobacco use among adolescents with behavioral problems. Although the magnitude of observed associations varied according to the country of residence, the strength of these associations and their significance by conventional standards were observed in nearly all the countries sampled. This is the first study in these seven countries on potentially causal relationships such as these. More research is needed to augment our knowledge regarding the observed cross-country differences and ultimately to develop, implement, and evaluate effective tobacco preventive intervention programs.Objetivos. Investigar la asociación entre los problemas conductuales y el consumo de tabaco en estudiantes adolescentes de seis países centroamericanos y la República Dominicana. Métodos. Los datos fueron extraídos de un estudio internacional en el que, en cada país, se aplicaron cuestionarios a 451-1 170 estudiantes adolescentes. Las evaluaciones se basaron en una versión adaptada al español del Cuestionario de Tamizaje del Consumo de Drogas (Drug Use Screening Inventory). Los análisis se realizaron mediante regresión logística condicional; los estudiantes se aparearon según el tipo de escuela y la zona, y se efectuaron otros ajustes estadísticos en función del sexo, edad y algunos factores de riesgo. Resultados. El consumo de tabaco presentó enormes variaciones de un país a otro. No obstante, combinando los datos de todos los países y controlando los efectos del sexo, edad, falta de participación en actividades recreativas, grado de irritabilidad y magnitud de los problemas escolares, familiares y de salud mental, se estimó que el consumo de tabaco en los jóvenes con los mayores grados de problemas conductuales era más de cinco veces mayor que en los jóvenes con los menores grados de problemas conductuales. Los análisis de cada país revelaron que los jóvenes con mayores problemas conductuales presentaban constantemente mayor consumo de tabaco que los jóvenes con menores problemas conductuales. Conclusiones. Estos resultados concuerdan con los de estudios anteriores acerca del consumo de tabaco en adolescentes con problemas conductuales. Aunque su magnitud varió en función del país de residencia, las asociaciones observadas fueron fuertes y significativas según los criterios convencionales en casi todos los países estudiados. Este es el primer estudio que se realiza en estos siete países para investigar posibles relaciones causales como estas. Son necesarias más investigaciones para ampliar los conocimientos sobre las diferencias observadas entre los distintos países y, en definitiva, para crear, poner en práctica y evaluar programas eficaces de intervención preventiva contra el consumo de tabaco.

Objectives. The purpose of this study was to examine the association between behavioral problems and tobacco use among adolescent students in six countries of Central America and in the Dominican Republic. Methods. Data were drawn from a multinational collaborative study that included questionnaire surveys of between 451 and 1 170 school-attending adolescents in each of the seven countries studied. Assessments were based on an adapted, Spanish-language version of the Drug Use Screening Inventory (DUSI). The conditional form of logistic regression was employed for analysis, matching students on type of school and area, with further statistical adjustments for sex, age, and selected risk factors. Results. Occurrence of tobacco use was observed to vary dramatically from country to country. Nonetheless, for the combined group of countries, the estimated odds of tobacco use in youths at the highest levels of behavioral problems was more than five times that for youths at the lowest levels, after controlling for sex, age, lack of participation in recreational activities, level of irritability, and levels of problems with school, family, and mental health. Country- specific analyses show that youths at the highest levels of behavioral problems have a consistently greater occurrence of tobacco use as compared to youths at the lowest levels of behavioral problems. Conclusions. These findings are concordant with prior studies on tobacco use among adolescents with behavioral problems. Although the magnitude of observed associations varied according to the country of residence, the strength of these associations and their significance by conventional standards were observed in nearly all the countries sampled. This is the first study in these seven countries on potentially causal relationships such as these. More research is needed to augment our knowledge regarding the observed cross-country differences and ultimately to develop, implement, and evaluate effective tobacco preventive intervention programs.

This analysis presents data on medical marijuana laws, cannabis use, and cannabis use disorders from 3 US national surveys conducted approximately 10 years apart.

The epidemiology of substance use (SU) and substance use disorders (SUDs) provides essential information for understanding the etiology of these complex conditions. After peaking in the late 1970s, overall SU rates declined during the 1980s and then rose again during the first half of the 1990s. Since the mid/late 1990s, overall SU rates declined slowly or remained generally stable. Within this overall pattern, many specific drug epidemics were observed, including crack cocaine, MDMA (ecstasy), methamphetamine, and, recently, prescription-type drug epidemics. Onset of both SU and SUDs is typically during adolescence and rates of SU generally peak in late adolescence and early adulthood. Early onset is associated with higher rates of SUDs and worse prognosis. Patterns of SU shift across different gender, race/ethnicity and age groups, with inhalants more commonly abused by children and early adolescents than by older adolescents and adults. Polysubstance use is a typical pattern of SU, especially among youth. Strong associations of SU/SUD and psychiatric illnesses are the rule rather than the exception, especially for antisocial personality disorder (and other personality disorders) and bipolar disorder. SU and SUDs result from a complex interplay of individual-level, environmental, and developmental factors. Numerous studies have found that heritability of SUD rises with age and with progression of disorders, suggesting that genetic factors play an increasing role as individuals pass through later adolescence into adulthood and as their SU advances to heavier use and addiction. Heritability studies have also shown that much of the genetic risk is nonspecific with regard to choice of substance. In addition to genetic vulnerability to SUDs, there is evidence for genetic predisposition to a constellation of externalizing behaviors across development (e.g. conduct disorder and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder). In addition to and often interacting with genetic risk, multiple environmental factors influence the onset and progression of drug use and drug-use disorders, including: adverse family circumstances, early stress and child abuse, parenting practices (especially parental monitoring), religiosity, prenatal exposures, peer factors, school factors, and neighborhood factors (including drug availability). Key observations with potential relevance for neuroscience research include: (1) SUDs frequently overlap with other psychiatric disorders, (2) polysubstance use is a typical pattern, rather than use of single substances, (3) the environment plays a key role in shaping vulnerability and resilience factors, and (4) developmental issues are central to understanding SU and SUDs, especially in terms of early risk factor exposures and timing of drug initiation.

Tobacco has been the most typical first drug used by youth in the United States, and rates of its use generally have been much higher than rates of illicit substances among youth. While tobacco use remains a major public health problem, dramatic strides have been made in the past 10 years in reducing the prevalence of use, particularly among teenagers

Cross-sectional studies remain a major source of data for research, practice, andpolicy, despitewell-known limitationsof this approach in assessing psychopathology. Such studies are especially valuablewhen the intent is to identify current or recent cases and in repeated studies where trends in rates can be examined. Yet, how well do they identify psychiatric symptoms and syndromes from the past? This is not a trivial questionbecause the accuracy of such classification is important for association studies and, in particular, for clinical neuroscience and genetic studies where the accuracy of phenotypic classification is essential todetermining the relationship of predictors and purported outcomes. Taken at face value, Takayanagi et al1 demonstrate that cross-sectional studies are much worse than longitudinal in identifying a history of psychiatric disorders. The authors find marked underestimates in lifetime prevalence estimates from a single cross-sectional study, and this lack of agreement with psychiatric symptom reporting across thewaves of interviews is remarkable.Among thosewho receivedadiagnosis inaprior wave, 92% of those with obsessive-compulsive disorder and about two-thirdsof thosewithmajordepressivedisorder,panic disorder, andsubstanceabuseordependence (bothalcoholand other drugs) did not report diagnostic symptoms sufficient for a diagnosis at the fourth interview. Also, somewhat surprisingly, recent receipt of mental health services made little difference in the accuracy of reporting of lifetime symptoms. Undoubtedly, a longitudinal study design has many advantages for inquiry: clear separationof riskandoutcomevariables, repeatedmeasurement of psychopathology to identify acute/temporary and chronic symptom patterns, and less reliance on long-term memory for reports. Similarly, assessment that includesmultipledistinct informants (typical inchild psychiatrywhere parents and teachers are routinely queried) can improvediagnostic coverage.2 The key issue for researchers is to determinewhen this additional information is worth the extra effort (and time) to acquire. A secondary and intriguing question addressed by Takayanagi and colleagues is whether there is something unique aboutmental illnesses thatmakes them particularly prone to poor recall comparedwith identifyingphysical ailments.Their results suggest that physical conditions are much more consistently reported thanmental illnesses.However, absent from the conclusions by Takayanagi and colleagues regarding the differencesbetweenaccuracyofpsychiatricdisorders and that of physical conditions is a discussion about the differences in the approachused to classify thephysical comparedwithpsychiatric conditions. The measures that provide the building blocks of psychiatric diagnosis in this study are reports of individual symptoms. TheDSMdiagnoses are constructed post hoc by the researchers based on the endorsement of a grouping of self-reported symptoms without any explicit discussionwith the studyparticipant about adiagnostic label. Physical conditions, on the other hand, aremeasured based on the respondent’s self-report of a diagnosis, presumably because a physician has diagnosed and informed them to that effect. It is clear that long-term recall of psychiatric symptoms has weaknesses, but is it reallyworse than recall of physical symptoms?Arepsychiatric disorders reported ashavingbeengiven by a physician different from report of physician-diagnosed physical conditions? We just do not know. Nevertheless, the important message about the limitations of recall of earlier symptoms is significant and suggests particular caution in interpreting lifetime diagnoses that may rely on reports of earlier symptoms. Results documented by the authors should be considered in thecontextofothermethodological issuesaswell, such as participant retention, case severity, and subthreshold diagnoses. The overall 53% follow-up rate at the wave 4 interviewsuggests thepossibility that those lost to follow-upmight have been the more severe cases, for whom case agreement between cumulative and retrospective estimates might have been greater. In addition, less severe cases could easily fall to subthreshold if only a single clinical feature is forgotten. Neither the number of clinical features endorsed toward a particularDSM diagnosis nor the frequency of subthreshold and barely threshold cases is reported. Might these or other biases influence the results? Possibly, although it is doubtful that differential attritionor othermethodological issues could account for the 3to 4-fold difference in rates identified by the authors. In addition, thoughtful sensitivity analyses examining the importanceof the change indiagnostic systems across thewaves of follow-up and thepotential influenceofcognitiveimpairmentonfindingsareallessential inensuringtheunderlyingvalidityof thefindings.Althoughthis is the first studyof the issueof recalled lifetimediagnosis comparedwithprospectivelyascertaineddiagnosis inadults, theresults are quite consistentwith thedifferences in cumulative vs cross-sectional lifetime rates in adolescents and young adults instudiesbyCopelandetal3 andMoffittetal.4Thus,weareconfident thatTakayanagi andcolleagueshave identifieda significant concern, andweareencouraged to reexaminehowweuse the results from cross-sectional surveys. Related article page 273 Opinion