Cited by 24Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesOpioid Use Disorder Treatment

Rumination and problematic substance use among individuals with a long-term history of illicit drug use

Memedovic, Sonja, Slade, Tim, Ross, Joanne, Darke, Shane, Mills, Katherine L., Marel, Christina, Burns, Lucy, Lynskey, Michael +1 more·2019·Drug and Alcohol Dependence

Abstract

Background Rumination is a cognitive process that is implicated in the development and maintenance of various forms of psychopathology, including problematic substance use. Most studies on the role of rumination in substance use have been conducted among community samples or individuals with alcohol use disorders and have predominately focused on overall rumination rather than differentiating between its subtypes, ruminative brooding and ruminative reflection. The current study therefore aimed to investigate i) whether rumination subtypes are associated with problematic substance use among people with a long-term history of illicit drug use independently of related psychological disorders (depression and post-traumatic stress disorder [PTSD]), and ii) whether gender moderates these relationships. Methods This cross-sectional study used data from the Australian Treatment Outcome Study (ATOS); a naturalistic prospective cohort study of people with heroin dependence. At the 11-year follow-up of ATOS, a total of 380 participants completed measures of rumination, depression, PTSD, and indices of problematic substance use. Results Hierarchical logistic regression analyses indicated that higher brooding scores were associated with current heroin dependence (OR = 1.11, CI: 1.01-1.22), polydrug use (OR = 1.16, CI: 1.06-1.28) and experience of injection related health problems (OR = 1.08, CI: 1.00-1.17), independently of depression, PTSD, and other covariates. Reflection was not relate…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2019.05.028

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 58 · Cited by 24

Authors
Memedovic, S., Slade, T., Ross, J., Darke, S., Mills, K. L., Marel, C., Burns, L., Lynskey, M., & Teesson, M.
Affiliations
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • King's College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Memedovic, Sonja
Venue
Drug and Alcohol Dependence
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-10
Volume
203
Pages
44-50
ISSN
0376-8716 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2966347382
Cited by
24
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 1
FWCI
2.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Drug and Alcohol Dependence (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
NHMRC (1009934)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
Keywords
rumination, problematic substance use, heroin addiction, polydrug use, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, moderating effect of gender, addiction treatment
MeSH terms
Rumination, Cognitive, Adult, Aged, Australia, Cross-Sectional Studies, Depression, Female, Heroin Dependence, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Sex Factors, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Substance-Related Disorders

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review