A transdiagnostic, dimensional classification of anxiety shows improved parsimony and predictive noninferiority to DSM.

IF 3.1 Q2 PSYCHIATRY
Elizabeth C Stade, Robert J DeRubeis, Lyle Ungar, Ayelet Meron Ruscio
{"title":"A transdiagnostic, dimensional classification of anxiety shows improved parsimony and predictive noninferiority to DSM.","authors":"Elizabeth C Stade, Robert J DeRubeis, Lyle Ungar, Ayelet Meron Ruscio","doi":"10.1037/abn0000863","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The current conceptualization of anxiety in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5)-which includes 11 anxiety disorders plus additional anxiety-related conditions-does not align with accumulating evidence that anxiety is transdiagnostic and dimensional in nature. Transdiagnostic dimensional anxiety models have been proposed, yet they measure anxiety at either a very broad (e.g., \"anxiety\") or very narrow (e.g., \"performance anxiety\") level, overlooking intermediate properties of anxiety that cut across DSM disorders. Using indicators from a well-validated semistructured interview of anxiety-related disorders, we constructed intermediate-level transdiagnostic dimensions representing the intensity, avoidance, pervasiveness, and onset of anxiety. We captured these content-agnostic dimensions in a sample representing varying levels and forms of anxiety (N = 268), including individuals with generalized anxiety disorder, social anxiety disorder, panic disorder, agoraphobia, specific phobia, separation anxiety disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, and obsessive-compulsive disorder (n = 205) and individuals with no psychopathology (n = 63). In preregistered analyses, our dimensional anxiety model showed noninferiority to DSM-5 diagnoses in predicting concurrent and prospective measures of anxiety-related impairment, anxiety vulnerabilities, comorbid depression, and suicidal ideation. These results held regardless of whether the dimensions were combined into a single composite or retained as separate components. Our transdiagnostic dimensional model offers meaningful gains in parsimony over DSM, with no loss of predictive power. This project provides a methodological framework for the empirical evaluation of other transdiagnostic dimensional models of psychopathology that have been proposed as alternatives to the DSM. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":73914,"journal":{"name":"Journal of psychopathology and clinical science","volume":"132 8","pages":"937-948"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","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/abn0000863","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

Abstract

The current conceptualization of anxiety in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5)-which includes 11 anxiety disorders plus additional anxiety-related conditions-does not align with accumulating evidence that anxiety is transdiagnostic and dimensional in nature. Transdiagnostic dimensional anxiety models have been proposed, yet they measure anxiety at either a very broad (e.g., "anxiety") or very narrow (e.g., "performance anxiety") level, overlooking intermediate properties of anxiety that cut across DSM disorders. Using indicators from a well-validated semistructured interview of anxiety-related disorders, we constructed intermediate-level transdiagnostic dimensions representing the intensity, avoidance, pervasiveness, and onset of anxiety. We captured these content-agnostic dimensions in a sample representing varying levels and forms of anxiety (N = 268), including individuals with generalized anxiety disorder, social anxiety disorder, panic disorder, agoraphobia, specific phobia, separation anxiety disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, and obsessive-compulsive disorder (n = 205) and individuals with no psychopathology (n = 63). In preregistered analyses, our dimensional anxiety model showed noninferiority to DSM-5 diagnoses in predicting concurrent and prospective measures of anxiety-related impairment, anxiety vulnerabilities, comorbid depression, and suicidal ideation. These results held regardless of whether the dimensions were combined into a single composite or retained as separate components. Our transdiagnostic dimensional model offers meaningful gains in parsimony over DSM, with no loss of predictive power. This project provides a methodological framework for the empirical evaluation of other transdiagnostic dimensional models of psychopathology that have been proposed as alternatives to the DSM. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

一种跨诊断的、维度的焦虑分类显示出对DSM的简化性和预测性的非劣效性。
目前《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第五版(DSM-5)中对焦虑的概念——包括11种焦虑障碍和额外的焦虑相关疾病——与不断积累的证据不一致,即焦虑是跨诊断的,本质上是多维的。已经提出了跨诊断维度焦虑模型,然而它们要么在非常广泛的(例如,“焦虑”)水平上测量焦虑,要么在非常狭窄的(例如,“表现焦虑”)水平上测量焦虑,忽略了跨越DSM障碍的焦虑的中间属性。使用来自一项有效的半结构化焦虑相关障碍访谈的指标,我们构建了中级水平的跨诊断维度,代表焦虑的强度、回避、普遍性和发作。我们在一个代表不同水平和形式的焦虑的样本(N = 268)中捕获了这些内容不可知论的维度,包括患有广泛性焦虑障碍、社交焦虑障碍、恐慌障碍、广场恐怖症、特定恐惧症、分离焦虑障碍、创伤后应激障碍和强迫症的个体(N = 205)和没有精神病理的个体(N = 63)。在预登记分析中,我们的维度焦虑模型在预测焦虑相关损害、焦虑脆弱性、共病抑郁和自杀意念的并发和前瞻性测量方面显示出与DSM-5诊断的非劣效性。无论维度是组合成单个组合还是保留为单独的组件,这些结果都是成立的。我们的跨诊断维度模型提供了比DSM更有意义的节省,而不损失预测能力。该项目为精神病理学的其他跨诊断维度模型的经验评估提供了一个方法框架,这些模型已被提议作为DSM的替代品。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c) 2023 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信