Developmental momentum toward substance dependence: Natural histories and pliability of risk factors in youth experiencing chronic stress

Abstract

BACKGROUND Mitigation of substance use (SU) disorder (SUD) risk factors is a common goal of prevention. Research has clarified much about risk factors including their prediction of SU/SUD, associations with other etiological variables and mediation of SU outcomes. Greater understanding of the emergence of risk factors themselves may improve prevention. For example, in lieu of experimental data, the level of resistance to change of a risk factor (its pliability) could inform “dosage” of intervention needed to reduce the risk. METHODS Two attributes of 22 previously-documented predictors of SU/SUD were quantified: natural history (average age-related trend) and pliability (quantified using correlations between intercepts and growth parameters of hierarchical linear modeling trajectories). The longitudinal sample of 1,147 8- through 16-year-olds were recruited from a northeastern summer camp for youth experiencing chronic stress due to one or more stressors (X̄ = 2.2 stressors, SD=1.41) which typically last at least one year. Half were male, 69.3% were European-American, 8.5% were African-American, and the remaining were small proportions each of other or mixed races/ethnicities. RESULTS Average trajectories of 21 predictors correspond to increasing SUD risk with age. Predictor pliability varied greatly, ranging from extremely high for School Commitment to extremely low for Peer Pressure Susceptibility. CONCLUSIONS Results suggest different intervention strategies may be needed to manage risk factors over the long-term. To illustrate, maintaining a high school commitment appears to require boosters whereas reducing peer pressure susceptibility appears to require high initial “dosage” with less need for boosters.

What’s New in Addiction Prevention in Young People: A Literature Review of the Last Years of Research

“…The school environment contributes some influencing factors, such as low educational outcomes (Gaffar et al, 2013; Zorbaz et al, 2015), low support from the adults in the educational community (Dickens et al, 2012; Barnard and Bain, 2015), the weak attachment of children to their school (Dickens et al, 2012), aggressive situations (Ridenour et al, 2012; Liu et al, 2013) and the influence of peers (Dickens et al, 2012; Gaffar et al, 2013). …”

The Space of Common Psychiatric Disorders in Adolescents: Comorbidity Structure and Individual Latent Liabilities

“…The hierarchical organization of psychopathology also suggests that there will be disruptions in some brain circuits or environmental conditions that serve as risk factors at the level of broad structures, whereas others will be specific to discrete disorders. 42 The application of the methods described in this study to a range of biological measures at multiple levels may also help advance new initiatives for improved classification and treatment of psychiatric disorders. 2, 43–45 …”

The full translational spectrum of prevention science: facilitating the transfer of knowledge to practices and policies that prevent behavioral health problems

“…This phenotype was selected due to a new and growing body of discovery research implicating distinct neurobiological and cognitive interactions in and differences between children with and without CU traits. T0-Youth with conduct problems are characterized by heterogeneous subgroups with disparate environmental risk factors, individual level vulnerabilities, and ultimately behavioral trajectories [23,24]. The presence of CU traits represents a specific subtype of conduct problems [25] that is characterized by callousness (deficiencies in empathy or remorse), unemotionality (fearlessness and blunted emotions), and uncaring attitudes and behaviors (aggression and difficulty maintaining relationships) [26].…”