自残思想和行为的生态瞬间评价:动机-意志综合模型构念的系统回顾。

IF 4.8 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Jmir Mental Health Pub Date : 2024-12-09 DOI:10.2196/63132
Lizzy Winstone, Jon Heron, Ann John, Olivia J Kirtley, Paul Moran, Jennifer Muehlenkamp, Rory C O'Connor, Becky Mars
{"title":"自残思想和行为的生态瞬间评价:动机-意志综合模型构念的系统回顾。","authors":"Lizzy Winstone, Jon Heron, Ann John, Olivia J Kirtley, Paul Moran, Jennifer Muehlenkamp, Rory C O'Connor, Becky Mars","doi":"10.2196/63132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The integrated motivational-volitional model (IMV) is one of the leading theoretical models of suicidal thoughts and behavior. There has been a recent proliferation in the assessment of suicidal and nonsuicidal self-harm thoughts and behaviors (SHTBs) in daily life.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This systematic review synthesized evidence from ecological momentary assessment (EMA) studies in the SHTB literature to address the following questions: (1) Which constructs in the IMV model have been assessed using EMA, and how have they been assessed? (2) Do different constructs from the IMV model fluctuate in daily life? (3) What is the relationship between the different IMV constructs and SHTBs in daily life?</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Consistent with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, we conducted systematic searches of 5 databases-Web of Science, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Europe PMC Preprints-from inception to March 26, 2024.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our searches resulted in the inclusion and narrative synthesis of 53 studies across 58 papers. A total of 15 IMV constructs were measured using EMA across the included papers. The most frequently measured constructs were thwarted belongingness (24/58, 41% of the papers), future thinking (20/58, 34% of the papers), and perceived burdensomeness (16/58, 28% of the papers). The least frequently measured constructs were humiliation, social problem-solving, mental imagery, and perceived capability for suicide. None of the included papers measured memory biases, goals, norms, or resilience using EMA. Comparison of intraclass correlation coefficients (45/58, 78% of the papers) revealed moderate but inconsistent within-person variance across all the examined constructs. We found evidence (39/58, 67% of the papers) of concurrent associations between almost all constructs and SHTBs in daily life, with some evidence that entrapment, shame, rumination, thwarted belongingness, hopelessness, social support, and impulsivity are additionally associated with SHTBs in lagged (ie, longitudinal) relationships.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Comparisons were hindered by variation in methodology, including the populations studied, EMA sampling scheme, operationalization of IMV constructs and SHTBs, and statistical approach used. Our findings suggest that EMA studies are a useful methodology for examining risk factors for SHTBs; however, more research is needed for some IMV constructs. Quality assessment suggested several areas for improvement in the reporting of EMA studies in this field.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42022349514; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=349514.</p>","PeriodicalId":48616,"journal":{"name":"Jmir Mental Health","volume":"11 ","pages":"e63132"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11667137/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ecological Momentary Assessment of Self-Harm Thoughts and Behaviors: Systematic Review of Constructs From the Integrated Motivational-Volitional Model.\",\"authors\":\"Lizzy Winstone, Jon Heron, Ann John, Olivia J Kirtley, Paul Moran, Jennifer Muehlenkamp, Rory C O'Connor, Becky Mars\",\"doi\":\"10.2196/63132\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The integrated motivational-volitional model (IMV) is one of the leading theoretical models of suicidal thoughts and behavior. There has been a recent proliferation in the assessment of suicidal and nonsuicidal self-harm thoughts and behaviors (SHTBs) in daily life.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This systematic review synthesized evidence from ecological momentary assessment (EMA) studies in the SHTB literature to address the following questions: (1) Which constructs in the IMV model have been assessed using EMA, and how have they been assessed? (2) Do different constructs from the IMV model fluctuate in daily life? (3) What is the relationship between the different IMV constructs and SHTBs in daily life?</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Consistent with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, we conducted systematic searches of 5 databases-Web of Science, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Europe PMC Preprints-from inception to March 26, 2024.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our searches resulted in the inclusion and narrative synthesis of 53 studies across 58 papers. A total of 15 IMV constructs were measured using EMA across the included papers. The most frequently measured constructs were thwarted belongingness (24/58, 41% of the papers), future thinking (20/58, 34% of the papers), and perceived burdensomeness (16/58, 28% of the papers). The least frequently measured constructs were humiliation, social problem-solving, mental imagery, and perceived capability for suicide. None of the included papers measured memory biases, goals, norms, or resilience using EMA. Comparison of intraclass correlation coefficients (45/58, 78% of the papers) revealed moderate but inconsistent within-person variance across all the examined constructs. We found evidence (39/58, 67% of the papers) of concurrent associations between almost all constructs and SHTBs in daily life, with some evidence that entrapment, shame, rumination, thwarted belongingness, hopelessness, social support, and impulsivity are additionally associated with SHTBs in lagged (ie, longitudinal) relationships.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Comparisons were hindered by variation in methodology, including the populations studied, EMA sampling scheme, operationalization of IMV constructs and SHTBs, and statistical approach used. Our findings suggest that EMA studies are a useful methodology for examining risk factors for SHTBs; however, more research is needed for some IMV constructs. Quality assessment suggested several areas for improvement in the reporting of EMA studies in this field.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42022349514; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=349514.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48616,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Jmir Mental Health\",\"volume\":\"11 \",\"pages\":\"e63132\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11667137/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Jmir Mental Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2196/63132\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jmir Mental Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/63132","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:动机-意志综合模型(IMV)是研究自杀念头和行为的主要理论模型之一。在日常生活中,对自杀性和非自杀性自残思想和行为(SHTBs)的评估越来越多。目的:本系统综述综合了SHTB文献中生态瞬时评价(EMA)研究的证据,以解决以下问题:(1)使用EMA评估了IMV模型中的哪些构建物,以及如何评估它们?(2)来自IMV模型的不同构式在日常生活中是否存在波动?(3)日常生活中不同的IMV构式与SHTBs有何关系?方法:根据PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and meta - analysis)指南,我们对web of Science、Embase、MEDLINE、PsycINFO和Europe PMC preprint这5个数据库进行了系统检索,检索时间从成立到2024年3月26日。结果:我们的搜索结果包括58篇论文中的53项研究和叙事综合。在纳入的论文中,共使用EMA测量了15个IMV结构。最常被测量的构式是受挫的归属感(24/58,41%的论文)、未来思考(20/58,34%的论文)和感知负担(16/58,28%的论文)。最不常被测量的构念是羞辱、社会问题解决、心理意象和自杀的感知能力。没有一篇纳入的论文使用EMA来测量记忆偏差、目标、规范或恢复力。班级内相关系数的比较(45/58,78%的论文)显示,在所有被检查的结构中,适度但不一致的个人差异。我们发现证据(39/58,67%的论文)表明,在日常生活中,几乎所有构式都与SHTBs存在同步关联,一些证据表明,诱陷、羞耻、反刍、挫败归属感、绝望、社会支持和冲动性在滞后(即纵向)关系中也与SHTBs相关。结论:比较受到方法差异的阻碍,包括研究人群、EMA抽样方案、IMV结构和shtb的操作以及使用的统计方法。我们的研究结果表明,EMA研究是检查SHTBs危险因素的有用方法;然而,对于一些IMV结构,还需要更多的研究。质量评估提出了在该领域的EMA研究报告中需要改进的几个方面。试验注册:PROSPERO CRD42022349514;https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=349514。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ecological Momentary Assessment of Self-Harm Thoughts and Behaviors: Systematic Review of Constructs From the Integrated Motivational-Volitional Model.

Background: The integrated motivational-volitional model (IMV) is one of the leading theoretical models of suicidal thoughts and behavior. There has been a recent proliferation in the assessment of suicidal and nonsuicidal self-harm thoughts and behaviors (SHTBs) in daily life.

Objective: This systematic review synthesized evidence from ecological momentary assessment (EMA) studies in the SHTB literature to address the following questions: (1) Which constructs in the IMV model have been assessed using EMA, and how have they been assessed? (2) Do different constructs from the IMV model fluctuate in daily life? (3) What is the relationship between the different IMV constructs and SHTBs in daily life?

Methods: Consistent with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, we conducted systematic searches of 5 databases-Web of Science, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Europe PMC Preprints-from inception to March 26, 2024.

Results: Our searches resulted in the inclusion and narrative synthesis of 53 studies across 58 papers. A total of 15 IMV constructs were measured using EMA across the included papers. The most frequently measured constructs were thwarted belongingness (24/58, 41% of the papers), future thinking (20/58, 34% of the papers), and perceived burdensomeness (16/58, 28% of the papers). The least frequently measured constructs were humiliation, social problem-solving, mental imagery, and perceived capability for suicide. None of the included papers measured memory biases, goals, norms, or resilience using EMA. Comparison of intraclass correlation coefficients (45/58, 78% of the papers) revealed moderate but inconsistent within-person variance across all the examined constructs. We found evidence (39/58, 67% of the papers) of concurrent associations between almost all constructs and SHTBs in daily life, with some evidence that entrapment, shame, rumination, thwarted belongingness, hopelessness, social support, and impulsivity are additionally associated with SHTBs in lagged (ie, longitudinal) relationships.

Conclusions: Comparisons were hindered by variation in methodology, including the populations studied, EMA sampling scheme, operationalization of IMV constructs and SHTBs, and statistical approach used. Our findings suggest that EMA studies are a useful methodology for examining risk factors for SHTBs; however, more research is needed for some IMV constructs. Quality assessment suggested several areas for improvement in the reporting of EMA studies in this field.

Trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42022349514; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=349514.

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
Jmir Mental Health
Jmir Mental Health Medicine-Psychiatry and Mental Health
CiteScore
10.80
自引率
3.80%
发文量
104
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: JMIR Mental Health (JMH, ISSN 2368-7959) is a PubMed-indexed, peer-reviewed sister journal of JMIR, the leading eHealth journal (Impact Factor 2016: 5.175). JMIR Mental Health focusses on digital health and Internet interventions, technologies and electronic innovations (software and hardware) for mental health, addictions, online counselling and behaviour change. This includes formative evaluation and system descriptions, theoretical papers, review papers, viewpoint/vision papers, and rigorous evaluations.
×
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