Performance on Cognitive Screening Tests and Long-Term Substance Use Outcomes in Patients with Polysubstance Use Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Cognitive impairments among patients with substance use disorders are prevalent and associated with adverse treatment outcomes. However, knowledge of the predictive value of broad cognitive screening instruments on long-term treatment outcomes is limited. The present study aimed to examine the predictive value of measures from the Montreal Cognitive Assessment® (MoCA®), Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WASI), and the Behaviour Rating Inventory of Executive Function - Adult version (BRIEF-A) on self-reported long-term substance use and abstinence in patients with polysubstance use disorders (pSUD). METHODS: A cohort (N = 164) of patients with pSUD who started a new treatment sequence in the Stavanger University Hospital catchment area were recruited and followed prospectively for 5 years. Participants completed neurocognitive testing with the MoCA®, WASI, and BRIEF-A at inclusion and were categorized as cognitively impaired or non-impaired according to recommended cut-off values. The sum score of the items from the Drug Use Disorders Identification Test Consumption scale (DUDIT-C) was used as a measure of substance use outcome 1 and 5 years after inclusion. We defined substance abstinence (DUDIT-C = 0) and heavy substance use (DUDIT-C ≥7) to determine whether cognitive impairments measured by the respective instruments were associated with and could predict abstinence and heavy substance use 1 and 5 years after baseline. RESULTS: At the 1-year follow-up, 54% of the total sample reported total abstinence from substances. Conversely, 31% presented heavy substance use. At 5 years, 64% of the total sample reported abstinence from substances, while 25% presented heavy substance use. The results showed a statistically significant association between cognitive impairment defined from MoCA® and higher continuous scores on DUDIT-C at 1-year follow-up. There were no differences in substance abstinence or heavy substance use between patients with and without cognitive impairment at the 1- and 5-year follow-ups. Furthermore, cognitive impairment did not explain substance abstinence or heavy substance use at the 1- and 5-year follow-ups. CONCLUSION: Generally, individuals with pSUD may be burdened and lack psychosocial resources to such an extent that cognitive functioning plays a subordinate role in long-term recovery. The present study suggests that results on screening tools assessing broad cognitive domains at treatment initiation have limited clinical value in predicting long-term substance use outcomes. There is a need to establish clinically viable instruments to assess cognitive functions with well-established clinical and ecological validity in the SUD population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".