Rumination and problematic substance use among individuals with a long-term history of illicit drug use
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
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Ruminative brooding is consistently linked to a more severe substance use profile.
“Ruminative brooding was consistently linked to a more severe substance use profile, 100”
From The revival of psilocybin between scientific excitement, evidence of efficacy, and real-world challenges (2024) · cites this paper as [100]
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
- ORCID
- 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