Search

Background: There is extremely limited population‐based research on social (pragmatic) communication disorder (SCD). Population‐based samples have the potential to better characterize the SCD phenotype by mitigating confounds and biases that are typical of convenience and clinical samples. Aims: The aims of this preliminary epidemiologic study were to advance our understanding of the SCD phenotype relative to developmental language disorder (DLD), obtain an estimate of prevalence, identify risk factors and lay the groundwork for future population level research of SCD. Methods & Procedures: We analysed existing data from the EpiSLI Database to examine social communication skills in 393 8th grade (13–14 years) children with and without a history of DLD. The primary measure used to evaluate SCD was the Children's Communication Checklist (CCC‐2). Two case definitions of SCD reflecting DSM‐5 criteria were examined. Both definitions involved significant pragmatic impairment, employing a commonly adopted clinical cut‐point of 1.5 SD. In one case, pragmatic deficits could occur along with structural language deficits and, in the other case (established using principal component analysis), pragmatic and social skills were disproportionately lower than structural language abilities. Outcomes & Results: When using the first case definition, SCD was much more common in children with a history of DLD than without DLD and history of language disorder at kindergarten was a significant risk factor for SCD in adolescence. However, it is important to note that SCD could be found in children with no prior deficits in other aspects of language. When the second definition was employed, SCD was equally distributed across children with and without a history of DLD. Male sex was a significant risk factor using this case definition of SCD. The estimated prevalence of SCD ranged from 7% (SE = 1.5%) to 11% (SE = 1.7%), acknowledging that prevalence depends on the cut‐point selected to determine communication disorder. Conclusions & Implications: These findings contribute to our understanding of the association between SCD and DLD by recognizing varying profiles of pragmatic and social communication difficulties, which in turn may help refine our diagnostic categories. Preliminary prevalence estimates of SCD can serve as an initial guidepost for identification and planning for intervention services for this condition. What this paper adds: What is already known on this subject: There is considerable debate about the diagnostic category of SCD and its relation to other neurodevelopmental disorders. What this study adds to existing knowledge: Using data from a US‐based epidemiologic sample of DLD, this study offers new information about the association between SCD and DLD, provides preliminary estimates of SCD prevalence, and identifies risk factors for SCD. Clinical implications of this study: Improved understanding of possible profiles of pragmatic and social communication deficits will help to clarify diagnostic categories and preliminary prevalence estimates may assist with ensuring availability of adequate intervention services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the past two decades, research on pediatric bipolar disorder has grown geometrically. The diagnosis of pediatric bipolar disorder was met with enthusiasm, which in healthy doses catalyzed change, and skepticism, which in good measure pushes for rigor. Skepticism led to productive questions about the phenomenology of pediatric bipolar disorder and how best to diagnose and treat it. With regard to prevalence, key questions included whether it was increasing over time, and whether it was limited to the United States. In 2011, we published a meta‐analysis addressing the prevalence questions; results indicated that bipolar disorder manifested at statistically indistinguishable rates in youth community samples across the world. In their recent paper, Parry et al. examine the studies included in the 2011 meta‐analysis using a qualitative approach. Their opinion piece represents a step backwards; every study has shortcomings, but in focusing on a dozen individual studies, Parry et al. fail to take into account the preponderance of evidence – literally thousands of articles across countries, cohorts and methodologies – that support the existence of bipolar disorder in both prepubescent youth and adolescents. This commentary addresses misperceptions regarding the diagnosis of bipolar disorder in youth, particularly with regard to cross‐informant agreement, to present converging data from international sources regarding the onset of bipolar disorder in childhood, and to correct the false claim that pediatric bipolar disorder is controversial. As clinicians and researchers, we have an obligation to do what we can to improve the lives of youth affected by mental illness. Denying the existence of a serious mood disorder will not serve the best interests of young people and will perpetuate the long delays many experience before getting an accurate diagnosis, appropriate treatment, and a fair chance at a good quality of life. Read the Editors' introduction at: doi: 10.1111/camh.12315 Read the core debate at: doi: 10.1111/camh.12231; doi: 10.1111/camh.12243; doi: 10.1111/camh.12306 Read more perspectives in this debate at: doi: 10.1111/camh.12318 doi: 10.1111/camh.12317; doi: 10.1111/camh.12316; doi: 10.1111/camh.12313; doi: 10.1111/camh.12310; doi: 10.1111/camh.12314 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Surveys of changes in drinking during the COVID‐19 pandemic have primarily relied on retrospective self‐report. Further, most such surveys have not included detailed measures of alcohol use patterns, such as beverage‐specific consumption, nor measures of alcohol use disorder (AUD) symptoms that would allow a comprehensive understanding of changes in alcohol use. Methods: Data from 1819 completed interviews from the N14C follow‐up survey to the 2019 to 2020 National Alcohol Survey (N14) were conducted between January 30 and March 28, 2021. Questions on alcohol use from the Graduated Frequency series, beverage‐specific quantity and frequency, and DSM‐5 AUD items were asked in both surveys and used to estimate changes from pre‐pandemic drinking to drinking during the pandemic. Analyses focus on changes in these measures over time and comparisons between key subgroups defined by gender, race/ethnicity, and age. Results: Key findings include particularly large increases in drinking and AUD for African Americans and women, reduced drinking and heavy drinking prevalence among men and White respondents, and a concentration of increased drinking and AUD among respondents aged 35 to 49. Increases in alcohol use were found to be driven particularly by increases in drinking frequency and the consumption of spirits. Conclusions: Results confirm prior findings of overall increases and subgroup‐specific changes, and importantly, provide detailed information on the patterns of change across major socio‐demographic subgroups. Substantial increases in the prevalence of DSM‐5 moderate to severe AUDs are a novel finding that is of particular concern. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite its potential to produce serious adverse outcomes, DSM‐5 alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS) has not been widely studied in the general population. Methods: We used cross‐sectional data from 36,309 U.S. adults from the 2012–2013 National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions‐III to examine the past‐year prevalence of AWS and its correlates. We focused on an important clinical population–past‐year drinkers with unhealthy alcohol use–i.e., those with a positive score on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test–Consumption (AUDIT‐C) questionnaire. We also examined the association of AWS with sociodemographic measures, psychiatric disorders, alcohol‐related measures, and healthcare utilization. Results: Approximately one‐third (n = 12,634) of respondents reported unhealthy alcohol use (AUDIT‐C+). Of these, 14.3% met criteria for a DSM‐5 AWS diagnosis. The mean (SE) number of withdrawal symptoms among individuals with AWS was 2.83 (1.88), with the most common being nausea/vomiting and insomnia (19.8% and 11.6%, respectively). Among AUDIT‐C+ respondents, the odds of AWS were significantly higher among males (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.17 [95% CI, 1.02–1.33]), unmarried participants (aOR = 1.55 [95% CI, 1.25–1.92]), and those at the lowest (vs. highest) income levels (aOR = 1.62 [95% CI, 1.37–1.92]). Among AUDIT‐C+ respondents, AWS was also associated with psychiatric disorders (with aORs that ranged from 2.08 [95% CI, 1.79–2.41]) for major depressive disorder to 3.14 (95% CI, 1.79–2.41) for borderline personality disorder. AUDIT‐C+ respondents with AWS also had higher odds of past‐year alcohol use disorder (aOR = 11.2 [95% CI, 9.66–13.07]), other alcohol‐related features (e.g., binge drinking), and healthcare utilization. Conclusions: Among individuals with unhealthy alcohol use, AWS is prevalent, highly comorbid, and disabling. Given the risk of AWS among unhealthy drinkers, a comparatively large segment of the general population, clinicians should seek to identify individuals with AWS and intervene with them to prevent serious adverse outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Little is known about remission, recovery, and other outcomes of alcohol use disorder (AUD) as defined by the DSM‐5. Methods: Data from a large representative sample of the United States was used to examine correlates of past‐year AUD status among individuals with prior‐to‐past‐year AUD: persistent AUD, symptomatic high‐risk drinking, asymptomatic high‐risk drinking, symptomatic low‐risk drinking, asymptomatic low‐risk drinking (nonabstinent recovery, NAR), and abstainer (abstinent recovery, AR). Multiple logistic regression analyses were conducted to compare: (i) AR and NAR with persistent AUD, (ii) AR with NAR, and (iii) asymptomatic and symptomatic high‐risk drinking with AR and NAR. Results: Among individuals with AUD prior to past year (n = 7,785), 34.2% were classified with persistent AUD, 8.8 and 1.6% were symptomatic high‐risk and symptomatic low‐risk drinkers, respectively, 21.5% were asymptomatic high‐risk drinkers, 17.9% were asymptomatic low‐risk drinkers, and 16.0% were abstainers. One‐quarter of individuals with AUD prior to past year achieved AR or NAR without the benefit of treatment, while a much greater percentage of individuals achieving AR (43.2%) reported receiving treatment relative to those with NAR (12.3%). The number of lifetime AUD symptoms was greater among those achieving AR (among the treated) and lower among those achieving NAR relative to persistent AUD. The number of AUD symptoms was also greater among those achieving AR than NAR and lower among asymptomatic and symptomatic risk drinkers relative to those achieving AR and NAR. Consumption was greater among those achieving AR relative to those achieving NAR and greater among asymptomatic and symptomatic risk drinkers relative to AR and NAR. Odds of achieving AR or NAR relative to persistent AUD were generally lower among non‐Hispanic Blacks and those with higher education, greater among women and married individuals, and lower among illicit drug users and individuals with histories of a personality disorder or mood/anxiety disorder. Conclusions: There appears to be a substantial level of recovery from AUD. Information on specific factors associated with AUD outcomes can be useful in targeting appropriate treatment efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To examine psychiatric and somatic correlates of DSM‐5 eating disorders (EDs)—anorexia nervosa (AN), bulimia nervosa (BN), and binge‐eating disorder (BED)—in a nationally representative sample of adults in the United States. Method: A national sample of 36,309 adult participants in the national epidemiologic survey on alcohol and related conditions III (NESARC‐III) completed structured diagnostic interviews (AUDADIS‐5) to determine psychiatric disorders, including EDs, and reported 12‐month diagnosis of chronic somatic conditions. Prevalence of lifetime psychiatric disorders and somatic conditions were calculated across the AN, BN, and BED groups and a fourth group without specific ED; multiple logistic regression models compared the likelihood of psychiatric/somatic conditions with each specific ED relative to the no‐specific ED group. Results: All three EDs were associated significantly with lifetime mood disorders, anxiety disorders, alcohol and drug use disorders, and personality disorders. In all three EDs, major depressive disorder was the most prevalent, followed by alcohol use disorder. AN was associated significantly with fibromyalgia, cancer, anemia, and osteoporosis, and BED with diabetes, hypertension, high cholesterol, and triglycerides. BN was not associated significantly with any somatic conditions. Conclusions: This study examined lifetime psychiatric and somatic correlates of DSM‐5 AN, BN, and BED in a large representative sample of U.S. adults. Our findings on significant associations with other psychiatric disorders and with current chronic somatic conditions indicate the serious burdens of EDs. Our findings suggest important differences across specific EDs and indicate some similarities and differences to previous smaller studies based on earlier diagnostic criteria. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study tests the association between past-year residential transience (RT), substance use disorder (SUD), major depressive episode (MDE), and suicidal outcomes in a nationally representative sample of noninstitutionalized, civilian, community-dwelling adults who participated in the 2008-2013 National Surveys on Drug Use and Health. RT, SUD, and MDE were each significantly associated with suicidal thoughts, plans, and attempts in models adjusted for each other and sociodemographic covariates. Because RT is independently associated with each suicidal outcome, even when there is no co-occurring SUD or MDE, assessment of RT should occur when screening for suicide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims To determine whether abstinence or relapse on a quit attempt in the previous year is associated with current depressive symptoms. Design Prospective cohort with approximately annual waves. Mixed-effect logistic regressions tested whether time 2 (T2) quitting status was associated with reporting symptoms at T2, and whether time 1 (T1) symptoms moderated this relationship. Setting Waves 5-8 of the Four-Country International Tobacco Control Study: a quasi-experimental cohort study of smokers from Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia. Participants A total of 6978 smokers who participated in telephone surveys. Measurements T1 and T2 depressive symptoms in the last 4 weeks were assessed with two screening items from the PRIME-MD questionnaire. Quitting status at T2: (1) no attempt since T1; (2) attempted and relapsed; and (3) attempted and abstinent at T2. Findings Compared with no attempt, relapse was associated with reporting T2 symptoms [odds ratio (OR) = 1.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.33, 1.59]). Associations between T2 quitting status and T2 symptoms were moderated by T1 symptoms. Relapse was associated positively with T2 symptoms for those without T1 symptoms (OR = 1.71, 95% CI = 1.45, 2.03) and those with T1 symptoms (OR = 1.45, 95% CI = 1.23, 1.70). Abstinence was associated positively for those without T1 symptoms (OR = 1.37, 95% CI = 1.10, 1.71) and negatively for those with T1 symptoms (OR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.59, 0.94). Age moderated these associations significantly. Relapse did not predict T2 symptoms for those aged 18-39 irrespective of T1 symptoms. The negative effect of abstinence on T2 symptoms for those with T1 symptoms was significant only for those aged 18-39 (OR = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.40, 0.94) and 40-55 (OR = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.40, 0.84). The positive effect of abstinence on T2 symptoms for those without T1 symptoms was significant only for those aged more than 55 (OR =1.97, 95% CI = 1.35, 2.87). Conclusions Most people who stop smoking appear to be at no greater risk of developing symptoms of depression than if they had continued smoking. However, people aged more than 55 who stop smoking may be at greater risk of developing symptoms of depression than if they had continued smoking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]