区分神经科学和精神病理学异质性的共同原则。

IF 3.1 Q2 PSYCHIATRY Journal of psychopathology and clinical science Pub Date : 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1037/abn0000907
Brian Kraus, Caterina Gratton
{"title":"区分神经科学和精神病理学异质性的共同原则。","authors":"Brian Kraus, Caterina Gratton","doi":"10.1037/abn0000907","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A primary goal of clinical neuroscience is to identify associations between individual differences in psychopathology and the brain. However, despite a significant amount of resources invested in this endeavor, few reliable neural correlates of psychopathology have been identified. A common suspect for this lack of success is the significant heterogeneity in symptoms observed in psychiatric disorders. However, this is not the only potential source of heterogeneity, as substantial heterogeneity is also observed in brain structure and function. Thus, for clinical neuroscience to identify reliable neural correlates of psychopathology, it will be necessary to better understand heterogeneity in both psychopathology and the brain. In this commentary, we suggest four shared principles that can help disentangle heterogeneity in both of these domains: (a) the brain and behavior should both be treated as complex measures, (b) a priori assumptions should be viewed with caution unless they can be replicated robustly in individuals, (c) complex models of individual differences require appropriate data to estimate them, and (d) the field would benefit from an increased focus on extensively measuring individuals, such as through the use of personalized models of psychopathology and neuroimaging data. Together, these shared principles can aid in better characterizing-and separating relevant and irrelevant-heterogeneity in measures of psychopathology and neuroimaging. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":73914,"journal":{"name":"Journal of psychopathology and clinical science","volume":"133 8","pages":"613-617"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Shared principles for disentangling heterogeneity in neuroscience and psychopathology.\",\"authors\":\"Brian Kraus, Caterina Gratton\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/abn0000907\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>A primary goal of clinical neuroscience is to identify associations between individual differences in psychopathology and the brain. However, despite a significant amount of resources invested in this endeavor, few reliable neural correlates of psychopathology have been identified. A common suspect for this lack of success is the significant heterogeneity in symptoms observed in psychiatric disorders. However, this is not the only potential source of heterogeneity, as substantial heterogeneity is also observed in brain structure and function. Thus, for clinical neuroscience to identify reliable neural correlates of psychopathology, it will be necessary to better understand heterogeneity in both psychopathology and the brain. In this commentary, we suggest four shared principles that can help disentangle heterogeneity in both of these domains: (a) the brain and behavior should both be treated as complex measures, (b) a priori assumptions should be viewed with caution unless they can be replicated robustly in individuals, (c) complex models of individual differences require appropriate data to estimate them, and (d) the field would benefit from an increased focus on extensively measuring individuals, such as through the use of personalized models of psychopathology and neuroimaging data. Together, these shared principles can aid in better characterizing-and separating relevant and irrelevant-heterogeneity in measures of psychopathology and neuroimaging. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73914,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of psychopathology and clinical science\",\"volume\":\"133 8\",\"pages\":\"613-617\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of psychopathology and clinical science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000907\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of psychopathology and clinical science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000907","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

临床神经科学的一个主要目标是找出精神病理学的个体差异与大脑之间的关联。然而,尽管在这项工作中投入了大量资源,但几乎没有发现精神病理学的可靠神经相关因素。造成这种乏善可陈的一个共同疑点是,在精神疾病中观察到的症状具有显著的异质性。然而,这并不是异质性的唯一潜在来源,因为在大脑结构和功能中也观察到大量异质性。因此,临床神经科学要想确定精神病理学的可靠神经相关因素,就必须更好地理解精神病理学和大脑的异质性。在这篇评论中,我们提出了四项共同原则,这些原则有助于厘清这两个领域的异质性:(a)大脑和行为都应被视为复杂的测量指标;(b)先验假设除非能在个体中得到有力的复制,否则应谨慎看待;(c)复杂的个体差异模型需要适当的数据来估算;(d)该领域将受益于对广泛测量个体的更多关注,例如通过使用个性化的精神病理学模型和神经影像学数据。这些共同的原则有助于更好地描述心理病理学和神经影像测量中的异质性,并将其相关性和不相关性区分开来。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,保留所有权利)。
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
Shared principles for disentangling heterogeneity in neuroscience and psychopathology.

A primary goal of clinical neuroscience is to identify associations between individual differences in psychopathology and the brain. However, despite a significant amount of resources invested in this endeavor, few reliable neural correlates of psychopathology have been identified. A common suspect for this lack of success is the significant heterogeneity in symptoms observed in psychiatric disorders. However, this is not the only potential source of heterogeneity, as substantial heterogeneity is also observed in brain structure and function. Thus, for clinical neuroscience to identify reliable neural correlates of psychopathology, it will be necessary to better understand heterogeneity in both psychopathology and the brain. In this commentary, we suggest four shared principles that can help disentangle heterogeneity in both of these domains: (a) the brain and behavior should both be treated as complex measures, (b) a priori assumptions should be viewed with caution unless they can be replicated robustly in individuals, (c) complex models of individual differences require appropriate data to estimate them, and (d) the field would benefit from an increased focus on extensively measuring individuals, such as through the use of personalized models of psychopathology and neuroimaging data. Together, these shared principles can aid in better characterizing-and separating relevant and irrelevant-heterogeneity in measures of psychopathology and neuroimaging. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

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
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Modeling the dynamics of addiction relapse via the double-well potential system. Adolescent social anxiety is associated with diminished discrimination of anticipated threat and safety in the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis. Prevalence, incidence, impairment, course, and diagnostic progression and transition of eating disorders, overweight, and obesity in a large prospective study of high-risk young women. Reification of the p factor draws attention away from external causes of psychopathology. Clarifying the place of p300 in the empirical structure of psychopathology over development.
×
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