Perceived Causal Networks: Clinical Utility Evaluated by Therapists and Patients.

Q2 Psychology
Journal for Person-Oriented Research Pub Date : 2023-06-17 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.17505/jpor.2023.25260
M Andreasson, J Schenström, J Bjureberg, L Klintwall
{"title":"Perceived Causal Networks: Clinical Utility Evaluated by Therapists and Patients.","authors":"M Andreasson, J Schenström, J Bjureberg, L Klintwall","doi":"10.17505/jpor.2023.25260","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Conceptualizing psychiatric disorders as idiosyncratic networks of mutually reinforcing behaviors and emotions has a long history in the form of psychotherapy case conceptualizations created collaboratively by therapist and patient. However, such methods are typically unsystematic and biased by therapist assumptions. An alternative is Perceived Causal Networks (PECAN), a structured online questionnaire in which patients quantify causal relations between problematic behaviors and emotions, and responses are visualized in the form of a network. In the present study, PECAN was evaluated for clinical utility at the start of therapy for five patients screening positive for depression. As expected, the five networks were found to be highly idiosyncratic, with two revealing the expected maintaining feedback loops. Both therapists and patients evaluated the method as useful in the initial phase of a therapy treatment. Although PECAN shows promise as a clinical tool, findings suggest that the method could be improved by including contextual factors maintaining depression.</p>","PeriodicalId":36744,"journal":{"name":"Journal for Person-Oriented Research","volume":"9 1","pages":"29-41"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10302660/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for Person-Oriented Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17505/jpor.2023.25260","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Conceptualizing psychiatric disorders as idiosyncratic networks of mutually reinforcing behaviors and emotions has a long history in the form of psychotherapy case conceptualizations created collaboratively by therapist and patient. However, such methods are typically unsystematic and biased by therapist assumptions. An alternative is Perceived Causal Networks (PECAN), a structured online questionnaire in which patients quantify causal relations between problematic behaviors and emotions, and responses are visualized in the form of a network. In the present study, PECAN was evaluated for clinical utility at the start of therapy for five patients screening positive for depression. As expected, the five networks were found to be highly idiosyncratic, with two revealing the expected maintaining feedback loops. Both therapists and patients evaluated the method as useful in the initial phase of a therapy treatment. Although PECAN shows promise as a clinical tool, findings suggest that the method could be improved by including contextual factors maintaining depression.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

感知因果网络:由治疗师和患者评估临床实用性。
将精神障碍概念化为由相互强化的行为和情绪组成的特异性网络由来已久,其形式是由治疗师和患者共同创建的心理治疗案例概念化。然而,这种方法通常缺乏系统性,并受到治疗师假设的影响。另一种方法是感知因果网络(PECAN),这是一种结构化的在线问卷调查,患者可通过该问卷量化问题行为和情绪之间的因果关系,并以网络的形式将患者的回答可视化。在本研究中,PECAN 在五名抑郁症筛查呈阳性的患者开始治疗时进行了临床实用性评估。不出所料,研究发现这五个网络具有高度的特异性,其中两个网络显示了预期的维持反馈回路。治疗师和患者都认为这种方法在治疗的初始阶段非常有用。尽管 PECAN 有望成为一种临床工具,但研究结果表明,该方法可以通过纳入维持抑郁的背景因素加以改进。
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
Journal for Person-Oriented Research
Journal for Person-Oriented Research Psychology-Psychology (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
23 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信