↓ Skip to main content

Utility of Machine-Learning Approaches to Identify Behavioral Markers for Substance Use Disorders: Impulsivity Dimensions as Predictors of Current Cocaine Dependence

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychiatry, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
137 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Utility of Machine-Learning Approaches to Identify Behavioral Markers for Substance Use Disorders: Impulsivity Dimensions as Predictors of Current Cocaine Dependence
Published in
Frontiers in Psychiatry, March 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyt.2016.00034
Pubmed ID
Authors

Woo-Young Ahn, Divya Ramesh, Frederick Gerard Moeller, Jasmin Vassileva

Abstract

Identifying objective and accurate markers of cocaine dependence (CD) can innovate its prevention and treatment. Existing evidence suggests that CD is characterized by a wide range of cognitive deficits, most notably by increased impulsivity. Impulsivity is multidimensional and it is unclear which of its various dimensions would have the highest predictive utility for CD. The machine-learning approach is highly promising for discovering predictive markers of disease. Here, we used machine learning to identify multivariate predictive patterns of impulsivity phenotypes that can accurately classify individuals with CD. Current cocaine-dependent users (N = 31) and healthy controls (N = 23) completed the self-report Barratt Impulsiveness Scale-11 and five neurocognitive tasks indexing different dimensions of impulsivity: (1) Immediate Memory Task (IMT), (2) Stop-Signal Task, (3) Delay-Discounting Task (DDT), (4) Iowa Gambling Task (IGT), and (5) Probabilistic Reversal-Learning task. We applied a machine-learning algorithm to all impulsivity measures. Machine learning accurately classified individuals with CD and predictions were generalizable to new samples (area under the curve of the receiver-operating characteristic curve was 0.912 in the test set). CD membership was predicted by higher scores on motor and non-planning trait impulsivity, poor response inhibition, and discriminability on the IMT, higher delay discounting on the DDT, and poor decision making on the IGT. Our results suggest that multivariate behavioral impulsivity phenotypes can predict CD with high degree of accuracy, which can potentially be used to assess individuals' vulnerability to CD in clinical settings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 137 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 135 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 18%
Researcher 23 17%
Student > Bachelor 19 14%
Student > Master 14 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 7%
Other 26 19%
Unknown 21 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 53 39%
Neuroscience 18 13%
Computer Science 9 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 6%
Engineering 5 4%
Other 17 12%
Unknown 27 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 December 2017.
All research outputs
#20,076,137
of 24,677,985 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#7,927
of 11,928 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#225,372
of 305,568 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#53
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,677,985 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,928 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 305,568 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.