重新定义、评估和分析创伤应激反应的中间方法。

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY Journal of traumatic stress Pub Date : 2023-12-04 DOI:10.1002/jts.23005
Shane W. Adams, Christopher M. Layne, Ateka A. Contractor, Maureen A. Allwood, Chérie Armour, Sabra S. Inslicht, Shira Maguen
{"title":"重新定义、评估和分析创伤应激反应的中间方法。","authors":"Shane W. Adams,&nbsp;Christopher M. Layne,&nbsp;Ateka A. Contractor,&nbsp;Maureen A. Allwood,&nbsp;Chérie Armour,&nbsp;Sabra S. Inslicht,&nbsp;Shira Maguen","doi":"10.1002/jts.23005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Alternative models of traumatic stress and broader psychopathology have been proposed to address issues of heterogeneity, comorbidity, clinical utility, and equitable representation. However, systematic and practical methods and guidelines to organize and apply these models remain scarce. The Middle-Out Approach is a novel, integrative, contextually informed framework for organizing and applying existing empirical methods to evaluate current and alternative traumatic stress reactions. Rather than beginning to identify traumatic stress reactions from the top-down (i.e., disorder-first approach) or bottom-up (i.e., symptom-first approach), constructs are evaluated from the middle out (i.e., presentation-first approach), unconstrained by higher-order disorders or lower-order diagnostic symptoms. This approach provides innovation over previous methods at multiple levels, including the conceptualization of traumatic stress reactions as well as the type of assessments and data sources used and how they are used in statistical analyses. Conceptualizations prioritize the identification of middle-order phenotypes, representing person-centered clinical presentations, which are informed by the integration of multidimensional, transdiagnostic, and multimodal (e.g., psychosocial, physiological) assessments and/or data sources. Integrated data are then analyzed concurrently using person-centered statistical models to identify precise, discrete, and representative health outcomes within broader heterogeneous samples. Subsequent variable-centered analyses are then used to identify culturally sensitive and contextually informed correlates of phenotypes, their clinical utility, and the differential composition within and between broader traumatic stress reactions. Examples from the moral injury literature are used to illustrate practical applications that may increase clinical utility and the accurate representation of health outcomes for diverse individuals and communities.</p>","PeriodicalId":17519,"journal":{"name":"Journal of traumatic stress","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Middle-Out Approach to reconceptualizing, assessing, and analyzing traumatic stress reactions\",\"authors\":\"Shane W. Adams,&nbsp;Christopher M. Layne,&nbsp;Ateka A. Contractor,&nbsp;Maureen A. Allwood,&nbsp;Chérie Armour,&nbsp;Sabra S. Inslicht,&nbsp;Shira Maguen\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jts.23005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Alternative models of traumatic stress and broader psychopathology have been proposed to address issues of heterogeneity, comorbidity, clinical utility, and equitable representation. However, systematic and practical methods and guidelines to organize and apply these models remain scarce. The Middle-Out Approach is a novel, integrative, contextually informed framework for organizing and applying existing empirical methods to evaluate current and alternative traumatic stress reactions. Rather than beginning to identify traumatic stress reactions from the top-down (i.e., disorder-first approach) or bottom-up (i.e., symptom-first approach), constructs are evaluated from the middle out (i.e., presentation-first approach), unconstrained by higher-order disorders or lower-order diagnostic symptoms. This approach provides innovation over previous methods at multiple levels, including the conceptualization of traumatic stress reactions as well as the type of assessments and data sources used and how they are used in statistical analyses. Conceptualizations prioritize the identification of middle-order phenotypes, representing person-centered clinical presentations, which are informed by the integration of multidimensional, transdiagnostic, and multimodal (e.g., psychosocial, physiological) assessments and/or data sources. Integrated data are then analyzed concurrently using person-centered statistical models to identify precise, discrete, and representative health outcomes within broader heterogeneous samples. Subsequent variable-centered analyses are then used to identify culturally sensitive and contextually informed correlates of phenotypes, their clinical utility, and the differential composition within and between broader traumatic stress reactions. Examples from the moral injury literature are used to illustrate practical applications that may increase clinical utility and the accurate representation of health outcomes for diverse individuals and communities.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17519,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of traumatic stress\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of traumatic stress\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jts.23005\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of traumatic stress","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jts.23005","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

创伤应激和更广泛的精神病理学的替代模型已经提出,以解决异质性,合并症,临床效用和公平代表性的问题。然而,组织和应用这些模型的系统和实用的方法和指导方针仍然很少。Middle-Out方法是一种新颖的、综合的、上下文知情的框架,用于组织和应用现有的经验方法来评估当前和替代的创伤应激反应。与其从自上而下(即,障碍优先方法)或自下而上(即,症状优先方法)开始识别创伤应激反应,不如从中间向外(即,表现优先方法)评估构念,不受高阶障碍或低阶诊断症状的限制。这种方法在多个层面上对以前的方法进行了创新,包括创伤应激反应的概念化,以及使用的评估类型和数据来源,以及如何在统计分析中使用它们。概念化优先识别中阶表型,代表以人为中心的临床表现,这是通过多维,跨诊断和多模式(例如,社会心理,生理)评估和/或数据源的整合而获得的信息。然后使用以人为中心的统计模型同时分析综合数据,以在更广泛的异质样本中确定精确、离散和具有代表性的健康结果。随后的以变量为中心的分析被用来确定文化敏感和环境相关的表型,它们的临床效用,以及更广泛的创伤应激反应内部和之间的差异组成。道德伤害文献中的例子被用来说明实际应用,这些应用可能会增加临床效用,并准确地代表不同个人和社区的健康结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Middle-Out Approach to reconceptualizing, assessing, and analyzing traumatic stress reactions

Alternative models of traumatic stress and broader psychopathology have been proposed to address issues of heterogeneity, comorbidity, clinical utility, and equitable representation. However, systematic and practical methods and guidelines to organize and apply these models remain scarce. The Middle-Out Approach is a novel, integrative, contextually informed framework for organizing and applying existing empirical methods to evaluate current and alternative traumatic stress reactions. Rather than beginning to identify traumatic stress reactions from the top-down (i.e., disorder-first approach) or bottom-up (i.e., symptom-first approach), constructs are evaluated from the middle out (i.e., presentation-first approach), unconstrained by higher-order disorders or lower-order diagnostic symptoms. This approach provides innovation over previous methods at multiple levels, including the conceptualization of traumatic stress reactions as well as the type of assessments and data sources used and how they are used in statistical analyses. Conceptualizations prioritize the identification of middle-order phenotypes, representing person-centered clinical presentations, which are informed by the integration of multidimensional, transdiagnostic, and multimodal (e.g., psychosocial, physiological) assessments and/or data sources. Integrated data are then analyzed concurrently using person-centered statistical models to identify precise, discrete, and representative health outcomes within broader heterogeneous samples. Subsequent variable-centered analyses are then used to identify culturally sensitive and contextually informed correlates of phenotypes, their clinical utility, and the differential composition within and between broader traumatic stress reactions. Examples from the moral injury literature are used to illustrate practical applications that may increase clinical utility and the accurate representation of health outcomes for diverse individuals and communities.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
6.10%
发文量
125
期刊介绍: Journal of Traumatic Stress (JTS) is published for the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies. Journal of Traumatic Stress , the official publication for the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, is an interdisciplinary forum for the publication of peer-reviewed original papers on biopsychosocial aspects of trauma. Papers focus on theoretical formulations, research, treatment, prevention education/training, and legal and policy concerns. Journal of Traumatic Stress serves as a primary reference for professionals who study and treat people exposed to highly stressful and traumatic events (directly or through their occupational roles), such as war, disaster, accident, violence or abuse (criminal or familial), hostage-taking, or life-threatening illness. The journal publishes original articles, brief reports, review papers, commentaries, and, from time to time, special issues devoted to a single topic.
期刊最新文献
The three axioms of resilience. A functional approach to defining and repairing moral injury: Evidence, change agents, clinical strategies, and lessons learned. Walking the line between fidelity and flexibility: A conceptual review of personalized approaches to manualized treatments for posttraumatic stress disorder. Medical traumatic stress: Integrating evidence-based clinical applications from health and trauma psychology. Conceptualizing disparities and differences in the psychobiology of traumatic stress.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1