Logistic regression with machine learning sheds light on the problematic sexual behavior phenotype
==================================================================================================

* Shui Jiang
* Keanna Wallace
* Esther Yang
* Leslie Roper
* Garima Aryal
* Dawon Lee
* Rohit J Lodhi
* Rick Isenberg
* Bradley Green
* David Wishart
* Katherine J Aitchison

## Abstract

There has been a longstanding debate about whether the mechanisms involved in problematic sexual behavior (PSB) are similar to those observed in addictive disorders, or related to impulse control or compulsivity. The aim of this report was therefore to contribute to this debate by investigating the association between PSB, addictive disorders (internet addiction, compulsive buying), other measures associated with the construct known as reward deficiency (attention deficit disorder and personality disorder), and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) in young adults in post-secondary education.

A Canadian University Office of the Registrar invited 68,846 eligible students and postdoctoral fellows. Out of 4710 expressing interest in participating, 3359 completed on-line questionnaires and 1801 completed the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI). PSB was measured by combining those screening positive (≥6) on the Sexual Addiction Screening Test-Revised (SAST-R) Core with those self-reporting monthly PSB. Current mental health condition(s) and childhood trauma were measured by self-report. OCD was assessed by a combination of self-report and MINI data.

12.18% (407/3341) of participants screened positive on the SAST-R Core. On logistic regression analysis (conventional and by machine learning), OCD, attention deficit, internet addiction, a family history of PSB, childhood trauma, compulsive buying and male gender were associated with PSB. On multiple correspondence analysis (MCA), OCD appeared to cluster separately from the other measures, and the pattern of data differed by gender.

In summary, factors that have previously been associated with the construct known as RDS and OCD are both associated with increased odds of PSB. The factors associated with RDS appear to contribute to a separate data cluster from OCD, and to lie closer to PSB.

## 1. Introduction

A theory of hypersexuality with dependence was first proposed by Orford in 1978.1 The term sex addiction was used by Carnes in 1983, 1990, and 19912 and by Goodman in 1998.3 Continuation of a sexual behavior despite adverse consequences and/or distress caused or worsened by the sexual behavior has been a consistent theme in the literature,1,3,4 despite differences of opinion as to whether the condition should be classified as an addiction or as an impulse control disorder. Diagnostic criteria proposed by Carnes in 20054 led to sex addiction being included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)-III-R (302.87). However, despite draft proposed criteria for the inclusion of sexual addiction and internet addiction in DSM-5,5 the only behavioral addiction currently included in DSM-5 (American Psychiatric Association 2013) is gambling disorder (312.31), which was first included in DSM as an impulse control disorder.6 In the International Statistical Classification of Diseases (ICD), compulsive sexual behavior disorder was proposed for inclusion as an impulse control disorder in 2014,7 which occurred in 2018.8 However, the scientific discussion about whether or not compulsive sexual behavior disorder could constitute a manifestation of a behavioral addiction was acknowledged,9 and it was predicted (as in the case of problematic gambling),6 that understanding would evolve as research elucidated the phenomenology and neurobiological underpinnings of the condition.

In this article, the term problematic sexual behavior (PSB) is used because it focuses on the behavior rather than on the potentially heterogeneous etiology and pathology.10 PSB is characterized by repetitive sexual behaviors and it is associated with uncontrolled sexual urges/impulses and distress,11 and social and functional impairments.8,11 It has been estimated that the prevalence of PSB is 3-6% in adults,4,12-14 with higher frequencies in specific populations, including those in post-secondary education. Reid (2011) reported that 19% of college men met criteria for hypersexuality,15 while Giordano and Cecil (2014) found 11.1% of men and women in an undergraduate sample met these criteria.16 Cashwell et al. (2015) reported that out of 379 undergraduates, 21.2% of men and 6.7% of women screened positive, i.e., scored in a range indicating that they should be offered further assessment for sexual addiction.17

Various vulnerability/risk factors have been associated with PSB, including those previously associated with the construct known as reward deficiency syndrome (RDS), such as substance18 and non-substance use disorders,19 ADHD,20 personality disorders,21 as well as other psychiatric disorders,22 and childhood trauma.23 In terms of psychiatric disorders, owing to the classification of PSB within ICD-10 as an impulse control disorder, we specifically included obsessive-compulsive disorder. Mick and Hollander (2006) hypothesized that impulsivity initiated the early stage of the PSB, with compulsivity being involved in repetitive behaviors and hence in the maintenance of PSB.24 The magnitude of the contribution of the various different postulated mechanisms, and whether PSB encompasses various syndromes with different etiologies is not at present known. Moreover, systematic data on the prevalence of PSB and associated sociodemographic factors across diverse populations, including non-treatment seekers remain to be provided.8

In light of the above, this paper aims to further elucidate the prevalence, sociodemographic features, phenomenology, and neurobiological underpinnings of the construct known as PSB in a diverse sample of adults in post-secondary education. We hypothesized that in this sample, firstly screening positive for factors previously associated with RDS (such as internet addiction, compulsive buying, nicotine dependence, and pathological gambling) and secondly OCD and childhood trauma would be associated with increased odds of PSB.

## 2. Methods

The study inclusion criteria were as follows: at least 18 years of age, undergraduates, graduates, postdoctoral fellows, and recently convocated students registered in at least one course in the preceding year, except for those who had completely withdrawn after registration, without any reasons to not return in the next academic term or not be on campus (such as suspension), and being able to answer in English. A Canadian University Office of the Registrar invited 68,846 eligible students and postdoctoral fellows by email. Students interested in participating then emailed the study team. These students were then sent an email invitation to review the participant information and complete consent on-line, followed by the screening measures (hosted by the Qualtrics platform), with a subsequent email inviting them to complete the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI).

### 2.1 Measures

The Sexual Addiction Screening Test-Revised (SAST-R)25 is a 45-item screening tool comprising several subscales designed to detect potentially problematic sexual behavior. Each question is answered in a binary manner (yes/no=0/1). Sexual activities deemed to be problematic by participants in the past 30 days were also separately assessed by asking the following question: “Within the last 30 days, how often have you participated in activities of a sexual nature that you would regard as problematic?”

Measures used to screen for internet addiction, compulsive buying, personality disorders, ADHD, nicotine dependence, and pathological gambling were the Internet Addiction Test (IAT),26 the Richmond Compulsive Buying Scale (RCBS),27 the 8-item SA-SAPAS,28 the full Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale (ASRS-v1.1),29 the Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND)30 and the DSM-V Pathological Gambling Diagnostic Form (PGDF),31 respectively. The self-report online administered Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) version was used to output psychiatric disorders by DSM-5 criteria. Having received a diagnosis of OCD, any other mental health condition(s), childhood physical, emotional/verbal, or sexual trauma, and a family history of domestic violence or of sexual addiction, gender and sexual orientation were additionally collected by self-report.

### 2.2 Data analysis

#### 2.2.1 Demographic data and logistic regression

Data were analyzed by STATA (Stata/SE 16) and R (Version 3.6.3) after dropping all of the missing data.

A “total PSB” variable was created by combining those screening positive on the SAST-R Core with those endorsing monthly self-reported PSB. Previous or current physical/emotional/sexual childhood trauma and a family history of domestic violence (11.77% 387/3288) were regrouped as total childhood trauma due to the relatively low rates of endorsement for the former group (physical trauma: 2.98%, 99/3322; emotional trauma: 6.87%, 232/3322; sexual trauma: 3.31%, 110/3212). SAST Core question 1 (which enquires about a history of sexual abuse in childhood or adolescence, SASTC1) was combined with total childhood trauma. The self-reported family history of sexual addiction (“yes”/ “no”) data was combined with SAST Core question 2 (which enquires about parental trouble with sexual behaviour, SASTC2) to create a new family history of PSB variable. IAT was regrouped as “yes” (N=1174, combining mild, moderate, and severe groups) and “no” (N=2160, the “normal” group). Owing to much lower endorsement rates (or lower than in another university student sample),32 the FTND (0.45%, 15/3332) and PGDF (2.28%, 76/3332) scores were dropped. In addition, due to the small numbers in the gender and sexual orientation minority subgroups, only men and women were included in the logistic regression analysis (N=3091).

Two-sample Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to determine the age difference between the PSB-positive and -negative groups. Data distributions were assessed by Pearson χ2 test. Tetrachoric (for binary variables) and Kendall’s τ (for categorical variables) correlations were utilized. SA-SAPAS, OCD, ASRS, IAT, childhood trauma, a family history of PSB and gender were used as covariates in regression analyses (Figure 2, Table 2-4). All reported *P* values are nominal. Multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) was used for data clustering.

View this table:
[Table 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/02/10/2022.01.31.21267382/T1)

Table 1. Distribution of demographic and clinical variables by total PSB group

View this table:
[Table 2.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/02/10/2022.01.31.21267382/T2)

Table 2. Results of logistic regression analysis of total PSB (N=3049, after removing outliers)

![Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/02/10/2022.01.31.21267382/F1.medium.gif)

[Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/02/10/2022.01.31.21267382/F1)

Figure 1. Correlation matrix for total PSB with demographic and clinical variables
*P* values are provided in Supplementary Table 3.

![](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/02/10/2022.01.31.21267382/F2/graphic-7.medium.gif)

[](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/02/10/2022.01.31.21267382/F2/graphic-7)

![](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/02/10/2022.01.31.21267382/F2/graphic-8.medium.gif)

[](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/02/10/2022.01.31.21267382/F2/graphic-8)

![](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/02/10/2022.01.31.21267382/F2/graphic-9.medium.gif)

[](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/02/10/2022.01.31.21267382/F2/graphic-9)

Figure 2. Forest plots of logistic regression of total PSB

#### 2.2.2 Machine learning approaches

The “Haven” and “dplyr” packages were used for data input. The “forcats” and “creditmodel” packages were used for recoding and splitting (80% training 20% testing), respectively. The Synthetic Minority Oversampling Technique (SMOTE) from the “Caret” package was used to address data imbalance in the training set.33 The leave-one-out cross-validation (LOOCV) in the “Caret” package was used for resampling.34 Logistic regression (two-class summary) in the “caret” package was used for regression. Accuracy, area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, sensitivity, specificity, and F score were used to evaluate the models. The “pROC” package was used for the area under the ROC curve.

#### 2.2.3 Multiple correspondence analysis (MCA)

Multiple correspondence analysis was conducted on OCD, RCBS, SA-SAPAS, ASRS, IAT, and childhood trauma stratifying by gender (women N=2084 and men N=1012). As a family history of PSB was correlated with the combined childhood trauma variable (tetrachoric ρ=0.69, *P*<0.001, N=3019, Figure 1, Supplementary Table 3), these variables were combined as a quality supplementary childhood trauma-related variable. The “FactoMineR,” “factoextra,” and “GDAtools” packages in R were used for analysis and data visualization.

View this table:
[Table 3.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/02/10/2022.01.31.21267382/T3)

Table 3. Results of machine learning (ML) logistic regression of total PSB

## 3. Results

Out of 4710 interested in participating, 237 withdrew from the study, 3359 completed online questionnaires using the Qualtrics platform, and 1801 completed the MINI (Supplementary Figure 1).

### 3.1 Demographic data

The mean score on the SAST-R Core Scale among all participants was 2.23 (SD=2.73), with 12.18% (407/3341) of participants scoring at least six (the threshold for screening positive in the general population.25 Of the 20 items composing the SAST-R Core questions, item 11 (Do you hide some of your sexual behavior from others?) was the most endorsed (1234/3341, endorsement rate: 36.78%), while item 9 (“Are any of your sexual activities against law?”) was the least endorsed (35/3342; endorsement rate: 1.05%) (Supplementary Table 1). The frequency of participants included in the total PSB variable was 16.53% (532/3219). There was a significant difference in the distribution of the following variables by those with and without PSB: gender, sexual orientation, OCD, RCBS, a family history of PSB, SA-SAPAS, current mental health condition(s), childhood trauma, ASRS, and IAT (Table 1 and Supplementary Table 2).

Data correlation showed that PSB was correlated with non-heterosexual sexual orientation (baseline: heterosexual), current mental health condition(s), childhood trauma, RCBS, OCD, SA-SAPAS, a family history of PSB, ASRS, IAT and gender (baseline: women) (Figure 1, Supplementary Table 3). Multiple variables were correlated with one another. For example, sexual orientation was correlated with current mental health condition(s). Current mental health condition(s) were correlated with childhood trauma, OCD, SA-SAPAS, ASRS; and were negatively correlated with gender (baseline: women). RCBS was negatively correlated with gender (baseline: women). In addition, our results indicated that that after subtracting SASTC1 and SASTC2, the PSB variable still had a strong correlation with SAST-R Core; and SAST-R Core was correlated with self-reported PSB (Supplementary Table 4). Similarly, self-reported OCD was correlated with MINI-identified OCD (Supplementary Table 4).

### 3.2 Regression models

#### 3.2.1 Logistic regression

Outliers were removed from logistic regression (N=47, with 8 responding “yes” to total PSB, Supplementary Figure 2) if their Pearson standardized residual had an absolute value of more than 2,35 or Hosmer-Lemeshow ![Graphic][1]</img> more than four.36 After outlier removal as above, no further outliers needed to be removed on the basis of leverage values (a measure of the distance between independent variable observations). The following variables were associated with PSB (pseudo *R**2*=0.16): OCD (*P*=0.015), ASRS (*P*<0.001), IAT (*P*<0.001), a family history of PSB (*P*<0.001), SA-SAPAS (*P*<0.001), childhood trauma (*P*<0.001), RCBS (*P*<0.001) and gender (men) (*P*<0.001) (Figure 2, Table 2).

#### 3.2.2 Machine Learning (ML) logistic regression

Our ML logistic regression showed that RCBS (*P*=0.0030), SA-SAPAS (*P*<0.001), OCD (*P*<0.001), a family history of PSB (*P*<0.001), ASRS (*P*<0.001), childhood trauma (*P*<0.001), IAT (*P*<0.001), and gender (men) (*P*<0.001) were all associated with increased odds of PSB (Figure 2B, Table 4). A validation of the existing model was also undertaken (Figure 2C, Table 3). The validation model was trained with SAST-R Core (subtracting SASTC1 and SASTC2, N=3141) and tested with self-reported PSB (N=3145).

### 3.3 Multiple correspondence analysis (MCA)

The MCA results showed that in both women and men, the first two dimensions accounted for the most explained variance (Supplementary Figure 5). PSB had a high degree of representation in all dimensions (Supplementary Table 7). PSB was strongly represented in both men and women in dimensions 1, 2, 4 and 5, although showing slightly different data clustering patterns by gender in these dimensions (Figure 3-4). In dimension 1 (44.00% of the explained variance in women and 39.10% of the explained variance in men, Figure 3 and Supplementary Figure 5), PSB was correlated with all variables in women and men. In dimension 2 (15.00% of the explained variance in women and 17.30% of the explained variance in men, Figure 3 and Supplementary Figure 5), PSB clustered with IAT and ASRS in men, and with RCBS, IAT and ASRS in women. In women, in dimension 4 (10.50% of the explained variance) and dimension 5 (10.10% of the explained variance), PSB was correlated with childhood trauma-related variables. In men, by contrast, PSB was correlated with childhood trauma-related variables just in dimension 5 (10.50% of the explained variance) but not in dimension 4 (11.60% of the explained variance) (Figure 4, Supplementary Figure 5). The contributions of variables to each dimension by gender is shown in Supplementary Figures 6-7 and Supplementary Table 8.

![Figure 3.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/02/10/2022.01.31.21267382/F3.medium.gif)

[Figure 3.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/02/10/2022.01.31.21267382/F3)

Figure 3. Results of multiple correspondence analysis (dimensions 1 and 2) in women (A) and men (B)

![Figure 4.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/02/10/2022.01.31.21267382/F4.medium.gif)

[Figure 4.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/02/10/2022.01.31.21267382/F4)

Figure 4. Results of multiple correspondence analysis (dimensions 4 and 5) in women (A) and men (B)

## 4. Discussion

The frequency of problematic sexual behavior, as defined by screening positive on the SAST-R Core, was 8.49% in the women and 19.70% in the men in this post-secondary education sample, consistent with prior reports in this population.15-17

Factors consistently associated with increased odds of PSB were gender, mental health conditions (ADHD, personality disorder, and OCD), other problematic behaviors such as internet addiction (IAT) and compulsive buying (RCBS), childhood trauma (including a family history of domestic violence), and a family history of PSB. Our results also showed that self-reported data were correlated with the screening tool or MINI data. For example, the binary SAST-R core was significantly correlated with self-reported “problematic sexual activities in the past 30 days” (τb=0.44, *P*<0.001, N=2049) and “maximum length of time on any single occasion spent in problematic sexual activities” (τb=0.32, *P*<0.001, N=2049). IAT is significantly associated with self-reported “problematic internet use in the past 30 days” (four categories IAT: τb=0.42, *P*< 0.001; binary IAT: τb=0.40, *P*<0.001, N=1441). SA-SAPAS was significantly correlated with antisocial personality order diagnosed by MINI (tetrachoric ρ=0.24, *P*=0.026, N=1788) and with self-reported borderline personality disorder (tetrachoric ρ=0.44, *P*<0.001, N=1429). Interestingly, a family history of PSB was shown to be strongly correlated with childhood trauma in our dataset (tetrachoric ρ=0.69, *P*<0.001, N=3019, Figure 1, Supplementary Table 3), and both were associated with PSB. Of those responding “yes” to a family history of sexual addiction, 32.65% (16/49) screened positive on the SAST-R Core. The combined variable, including a family history of sexual addiction and SASTC2 (with 6.55% endorsement: 214/3268) was significant in all models.

Our model validation did show a lower F score than the final model training and testing with total PSB, probably due to the difference between screening and self-report data (training with SAST-R Core and testing with self-reported PSB, Figure 2C, Table 4). A sensitivity analysis (Supplementary Figure 3-4, Supplementary Table 5-6) was undertaken using the original variables, namely SAST-R Core (without subtracting SASTC1 and SASTC2), childhood trauma (without adding SASTC1 or a family history of domestic violence) and a family history of sexual addiction (without incorporating SASTC2). The logistic regression model using these variables (pseudo *R**2*=0.13) revealed that RCBS (*P*=0.033), ASRS (*P*<0.001), IAT (*P*<0.001), OCD (*P*<0.001), childhood trauma (*P*<0.001), and gender (baseline: women, *P*<0.001) remained significant, but not a family history of sexual addiction (*P*=0.17), probably due to the lower frequency of endorsement of this variable (N=49) compared to SASTC2. Using the new total PSB variable, childhood trauma, a family history of PSB and excluding sexual orientation as well as current mental health condition(s) improved the sensitivity and F-score in logistic regression. This strategy also improved the specificity and F score in ML logistic regression. ML logistic regression in general showed a higher sensitivity and F score compared to logistic regression.

The variables previously associated with the RDS construct, such as SA-SAPAS, ASRS, and IAT, were associated with increased odds of PSB. In the final logistic (Figure 2, Table 2) and ML logistic regression (Figure 2, Table 3), RCBS was associated with increased odds of PSB. Of note, there were gender differences regarding RCBS: RCBS was negatively correlated with men (Figure 1, baseline: women), and PSB displayed a weaker association with RCBS in men on MCA (Figures 3 and 4).

In addition, interestingly, the distribution of PSB differed significantly between OCD-positive and -negative groups (*P*<0.001, Table 2), and PSB was correlated with OCD *(r*=0.27, *P*<0.001, Figure 1, Supplementary Table 3). In our final regression models and sensitivity analyses (by both logistic and ML logistic regression), OCD was associated with increased odds of PSB (OR 1.79, *P*=0.015; and OR 1.85, *P*=0.013, Sensitivity model: OR 2.28, *P*<0.001; and OR 1.73, *P*=0.033, respectively). The MCA results also indicated that PSB had a less strong association with OCD than with SA-SAPAS, IAT and ASRS in women and men, as it clustered further away from PSB (Figure 3).

Limitations of this study include the following. Firstly, as respondents to the email from the registrar knew the subject area of the study, there is a potential selection bias. However, the frequency of PSB in our dataset was comparable to that seen in other studies of adults in post-secondary education as mentioned above.12,17 Subsample sizes were a limiting factor in sexual orientation and in gender subgroups other than cis-men and cis-women, and therefore the smaller groups were combined or dropped. Another potential limitation is that we dropped missing values (rather than using imputation). Various methods may be used to deal with missing data.

Some such methods (e.g., multiple by monotone imputation, or imputation by chained equations) may introduce bias, and perfect (inaccurate) predictions, as the methods themselves involve the fitting of a regression model for a categorical outcome.37 However, if the proportion of missing data is relatively small (5% or less), this should not be problematic.38 In our sample, the feature with the most missing data in the SAST-R core scale was: “SASTC14 -- Feel depressed after having sex, “ with only 16 out of 3341 (0.48%) missingness (and out of those 16 participants, only 1 scored as SAST-R core positive). Another limitation is that logistic regression is sensitive to high correlations among predictor variables. Although several variables were correlated with each other in our dataset, correlation coefficients among these variables were less than 0.80,39 and the mean variance inflation factor (VIF) and the condition number were at acceptable levels (VIF<10, condition number<10) for our final models,40 indicating multicollinearity was not a significant concern. A power calculation is provided in Supplementary Table 9. Using our model parameters, a sample size of 361 would have a power of 0.90.

Genetic and other biological variables may be associated with a greater likelihood of PSB that is as yet unexplained by our models (pseudo *R**2*=0.16, Table 2). Future directions should include incorporating such factors, and optimizing the model for enhanced predictive power through the comparison and use of alternative machine learning models, feature selection techniques, and methods for computing missing values, as well as expanding the validation by the use of additional independent datasets.

## 5. Conclusions

In summary, we have identified associations between problematic sexual behavior in adults in post-secondary education participating in a study on this topic and the following: compulsive buying, personality disorder, OCD, ADHD, childhood trauma, a family history of PSB, internet addiction, and gender (men). Our results not only suggest that measures associated with reward deficiency syndrome are associated with PSB, but also that OCD is a vulnerability factor with a separate contribution. Childhood trauma and a family history of domestic violence also showed associations with PSB, implying that emotional regulation and attachment style may be involved in the development of PSB. Our data are consistent with different subgroups within PSB with contrasting etiological mechanisms that differ by gender.

## Supporting information

Supplementary Material [[supplements/267382_file02.pdf]](pending:yes)

## Data Availability

Data produced in the present study are available in deidentified format upon reasonable request to the authors.

## 7. Funding

The study was funded by an Alberta Centennial Addiction and Mental Health Research Chair and translational funding (to KJA), and by the American Foundation for Addiction Research. Several scholarships, including the University of Alberta Dean’s Doctoral Student Award 2021-2022 (to SJ), University of Alberta Medical Science Graduate Program Scholarship 2020 (to SJ), University of Alberta Doctoral Recruitment Scholarship 2017 (to SJ), Alberta Graduate Excellence Scholarship 2020 (to SJ), and a Janssen Inc., Canada Fellowship (fellowship to KJA; fellow=SJ) provided additional funding for the first author. A Fulbright-Canada-Palix Foundation grant to Dr. Patrick Carnes facilitated his contributions to study design.

## Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge the contribution of Dr. Patrick Carnes to the study design, and volunteer input of Penny Carnes, Grace Li, Hana Graham, and Chanelle Martens to data collection. SJ would like to thank Afia Anjum from DW’s lab for her assistance with R.

## Footnotes

*   The titles of figures and tables have been changed; Small subcategories were removed from the Tables and Supplementary Tables; Two Figures with individual biplots were removed.

*   Received January 31, 2022.
*   Revision received February 9, 2022.
*   Accepted February 10, 2022.


*   © 2022, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

The copyright holder for this pre-print is the author. All rights reserved. The material may not be redistributed, re-used or adapted without the author's permission.

## References

1.  1.Orford J. Hypersexuality: implications for a theory of dependence. Br J Addict Alcohol Other Drugs. Sep 1978;73(3):299–10. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-0443.1978.tb00157.x](http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-0443.1978.tb00157.x)
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=280354&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F02%2F10%2F2022.01.31.21267382.atom) 

2.  2.Carnes P. Don’ t call it love : recovery from sexual addiction. Bantam Books; 1991:439 p.
    
    

3.  3.Goodman A. Sexual addiction: terminology and theory. Psychiatric Times 1998;15(7):22–26.
    
    

4.  4.Carnes P. Sexual addiction. 8 ed. vol I. Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins: A Wolters Kluwer Company; 2005.
    
    

5.  5.Carnes PJ, Hopkins TA, Green BA. Clinical relevance of the proposed sexual addiction diagnostic criteria: relation to the Sexual Addiction Screening Test-Revised. Journal of addiction medicine. Nov-Dec 2014;8(6):450–61. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ADM.0000000000000080](http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ADM.0000000000000080)
    
    

6.  6.Rosenthal RJ. Inclusion of pathological gambling in DSM-III, its classification as a disorder of impulse control, and the role of Robert Custer. International Gambling Studies. 2020;20(1):151–170. doi:[https://doi.org/10.1080/14459795.2019.1638432](https://doi.org/10.1080/14459795.2019.1638432)
    
    

7.  7.Rehm J, Probst C, Kraus L, Lev-Ran S. The addiction concept revisited. Reframing addiction: Policies, processes and pressures. The ALICE RAP project; 2014:103–117.
    
    

8.  8.Kraus SW, Krueger RB, Briken P, et al. Compulsive sexual behaviour disorder in the ICD-11. World Psychiatry. Feb 2018;17(1):109–110. doi:10.1002/wps.20499
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/wps.20499&link_type=DOI) 

9.  9.Griffiths MD. Compulsive sexual behaviour as a behavioural addiction: The impact of the internet and other issues. Addiction. 2016;111(12):2107–2108. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/add.13315](http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/add.13315)
    
    

10. 10.Joannides P. The challenging landscape of problematic sexual behaviors, including “sexual addiction” and “hypersexuality.”. New directions in sex therapy: Innovations and alternatives. 2012:69–83.
    
    

11. 11.Dickenson JA, Gleason N, Coleman E, Miner MH. Prevalence of Distress Associated With Difficulty Controlling Sexual Urges, Feelings, and Behaviors in the United States. JAMA Netw Open. Nov 2 2018;1(7):e184468. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.4468
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.4468&link_type=DOI) 

12. 12.Carnes PJ, Green BA, Merlo LJ, Polles A, Carnes S, Gold MS. PATHOS: a brief screening application for assessing sexual addiction. J Addict Med. Mar 2012;6(1):29–34. doi:10.1097/ADM.0b013e3182251a28
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1097/ADM.0b013e3182251a28&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=21817915&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F02%2F10%2F2022.01.31.21267382.atom) 

13. 13.Carnes PJ. Facing the Shadow: Starting Sexual and Relationship Recovery: a Gentle Path to Beginning Recovery from Sex Addiction. Gentle Path Press; 2015.
    
    

14. 14.Klein V, Rettenberger M, Briken P. Self-reported indicators of hypersexuality and its correlates in a female online sample. J Sex Med. Aug 2014;11(8):1974–81. doi:10.1111/jsm.12602
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1111/jsm.12602&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24909396&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F02%2F10%2F2022.01.31.21267382.atom) 

15. 15.Reid RC, Li DS, Gilliland R, Stein JA, Fong T. Reliability, validity, and psychometric development of the pornography consumption inventory in a sample of hypersexual men. J Sex Marital Ther. 2011;37(5):359–85. doi:10.1080/0092623x.2011.607047
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1080/0092623x.2011.607047&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=21961444&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F02%2F10%2F2022.01.31.21267382.atom) 

16. 16.Giordano AL, Cecil AL. Religious coping, spirituality, and hypersexual behavior among college students. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity. 2014;21(3):225–239. doi:[https://doi.org/10.1080/10720162.2014.936542](https://doi.org/10.1080/10720162.2014.936542)
    
    

17. 17.Cashwell C L. Giordano A, Lewis T A. Wachtel K L. Bartley J. Using the PATHOS Questionnaire for Screening Sexual Addiction Among College Students: A Preliminary Exploration. vol 22. 2015.
    
    

18. 18.Deneke E, Knepper C, Green BA, Carnes PJ. Comparative study of three levels of care in a substance use disorder inpatient facility on risk for sexual addiction. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity. 2015;22(2):109–125.
    
    

19. 19.Carnes PJ. The Sexual Addiction Screening Process. Clinical Management of Sex Addiction. 2019:21–39.
    
    

20. 20.Blankenship R, Laaser M. Sexual Addiction and ADHD: Is There A Connection? Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity. 2004/01/01 2004;11(1-2):7–20. doi:10.1080/10720160490458184
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1080/10720160490458184&link_type=DOI) 

21. 21.Ballester-Arnal R, Castro-Calvo J, Giménez-García C, Gil-Juliá B, Gil-Llario M. Psychiatric comorbidity in compulsive sexual behavior disorder (CSBD). Addictive behaviors. 2020;107:106384.
    
    

22. 22.Grant JE, Lust K, Chamberlain SR. Body dysmorphic disorder and its relationship to sexuality, impulsivity, and addiction. Psychiatry Research. 2019/03/01/ 2019;273:260–265. doi:[https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2019.01.036](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2019.01.036)
    
    

23. 23.London S, Quinn K, Scheidell JD, Frueh BC, Khan MR. Adverse Experiences in Childhood and Sexually Transmitted Infection Risk From Adolescence Into Adulthood. Sexually transmitted diseases. Sep 2017;44(9):524–532. doi:10.1097/OLQ.0000000000000640
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1097/OLQ.0000000000000640&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F02%2F10%2F2022.01.31.21267382.atom) 

24. 24.Mick TM, Hollander E. Impulsive-compulsive sexual behavior. CNS Spectr. Dec 2006;11(12):944–55. doi:10.1017/s1092852900015133
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1017/s1092852900015133&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=17146408&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F02%2F10%2F2022.01.31.21267382.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000243273000012&link_type=ISI) 

25. 25.Carnes P, Green B, Carnes S. The same yet different: Refocusing the Sexual Addiction Screening Test (SAST) to reflect orientation and gender. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity. 2010;17(1):7–30.
    
    

26. 26.Young KS. Internet addiction: The emergence of a new clinical disorder. Cyberpsychology & behavior. 1998;1(3):237–244.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1089/cpb.1998.1.237&link_type=DOI) 

27. 27.Ridgway NM, Kukar-Kinney M, Monroe KB. An expanded conceptualization and a new measure of compulsive buying. Journal of consumer Research. 2008;35(4):622–639.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1086/591108&link_type=DOI) 

28. 28.Merlhiot G, Mondillon L, Vermeulen N, Basu A, Mermillod M. Adaptation and Validation of the Standardized Assessment of Personality–Abbreviated Scale as a Self-Administered Screening Test (SA-SAPAS). Journal of Psychology and Psychotherapy. 2014;4:6. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2161-0487.1000164](http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2161-0487.1000164)
    
    

29. 29.Kessler RC, Adler L, Ames M, et al. The World Health Organization Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale (ASRS): a short screening scale for use in the general population. Psychol Med. Feb 2005;35(2):245–56. doi:10.1017/s0033291704002892
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1017/S0033291704002892&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=15841682&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F02%2F10%2F2022.01.31.21267382.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000231499500009&link_type=ISI) 

30. 30.Heatherton TF, Kozlowski LT, Frecker RC, Fagerstrom KO. The Fagerström test for nicotine dependence: a revision of the Fagerstrom Tolerance Questionnaire. British journal of addiction. 1991;86(9):1119–1127.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1111/j.1360-0443.1991.tb01879.x&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=1932883&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F02%2F10%2F2022.01.31.21267382.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1991GD27400011&link_type=ISI) 

31. 31.Rennert L, Denis C, Peer K, Lynch KG, Gelernter J, Kranzler HR. DSM-5 gambling disorder: prevalence and characteristics in a substance use disorder sample. Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology. 2014;22(1):50–56. doi:10.1037/a0034518
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1037/a0034518&link_type=DOI) 

32. 32.Öncel SY, Gebizlioğlu ÖL, Alioğlu FA. Risk factors for smoking behavior among university students. Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences. 2011;41(6):1071–1080. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.3906/sag-1009-1122](http://dx.doi.org/10.3906/sag-1009-1122)
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000298197700018&link_type=ISI) 

33. 33.Benedan L, Monti GS. Predicting the Risk of Gambling Activities in Adolescence: A Case Study. Springer; 2019:47–57.
    
    

34. 34.Nwanganga F, Chapple M. Practical Machine Learning in R. John Wiley & Sons; 2020.
    
    

35. 35.Chen CY, Yang HCP, Chen CW, Chen TH. Diagnosing and revising logistic regression models: effect on internal solitary wave propagation. Engineering Computations. 2008;
    
    

36. 36.Hosmer Jr DW, Lemeshow S, Sturdivant RX. Applied logistic regression. vol 398. John Wiley & Sons; 2013.
    
    

37. 37.White IR, Daniel R, Royston P. Avoiding bias due to perfect prediction in multiple imputation of incomplete categorical variables. Comput Stat Data Anal. 2010;54(10):2267–2275. doi:10.1016/j.csda.2010.04.005
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.csda.2010.04.005&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24748700&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F02%2F10%2F2022.01.31.21267382.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000279096500006&link_type=ISI) 

38. 38.Momeni A, Pincus M, Libien J. Imputation and Missing Data. Introduction to Statistical Methods in Pathology. Springer International Publishing; 2018:185–200.
    
    

39. 39.Shrestha N. Detecting Multicollinearity in Regression Analysis. American Journal of Applied Mathematics and Statistics. 2020/06/16 2020;8(2):39–42. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.12691/ajams-8-2-1](http://dx.doi.org/10.12691/ajams-8-2-1)
    
    

40. 40.Kim JH. Multicollinearity and misleading statistical results. Korean J Anesthesiol. Dec 2019;72(6):558–569. doi:10.4097/kja.19087
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.4097/kja.19087&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F02%2F10%2F2022.01.31.21267382.atom)

 [1]: /embed/inline-graphic-1.gif