Abstract
Aim In DSM-5, definitions of substance use disorders (SUD) were changed considerably from DSM-IV, yet little is known about how well DSM-IV and DSM-5 SUD diagnoses agree with each other within a series of individuals with substance use problems.
Methods Prevalences and chance-corrected agreement of DSM-5 SUD and DSM-IV substance dependence were evaluated in 588 adult substance users, interviewed by clinician interviewers using the semi-structured Psychiatric Research Interview for Substance and Mental Disorders (PRISM-5). Alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, cocaine, heroin, opioid, sedative, and stimulant use disorders were examined. Cohen’s kappa was used to assess agreement between DSM-5 and DSM-IV SUD (including abuse or dependence), DSM-5 SUD and DSM-IV dependence, and DSM-5 moderate-to-severe SUD and DSM-IV dependence.
Results Agreement between DSM-5 and DSM-IV SUD was excellent for alcohol, cocaine, heroin, opioids, sedatives, and stimulants (κ=0.84; 0.91; 0.99; 0.96; 0.92; 0.97; respectively) and substantial for alcohol and tobacco (κ=0.75; 0.80, respectively). Agreement between DSM-5 SUD and DSM-IV substance dependence was excellent for cocaine, heroin, opioids, sedatives, and stimulants (κ=0.89; 0.97; 0.90; 0.88; 0.94, respectively) and substantial for alcohol, tobacco, and cannabis (κ=0.75; 0.69; 0.63, respectively). Agreement between moderate and severe DSM-5 SUD and DSM-IV dependence was excellent across all substances.
Conclusion Findings suggest that while care should always be used in interpreting the results of studies using different methods, studies relying on DSM-IV or DSM-5 SUD diagnostic criteria can be considered to offer similar information and thus can be compared when accumulating a body of evidence on a particular issue regarding substance use.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Funding supported by grant R01DA018652
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
New York State Psychiatric Institute, Research Foundation for Mental Hygiene (R01DA018652)
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
This study was conducted as a part of a larger study investigating reliability and validity of substance use disorders. For information regarding the data, please contact dsh2{at}cumc.columbia.edu
