H Delamain, R Saunders, M Tanzer, P Luyten, P Fonagy, C Campbell
{"title":"基于认知立场、依恋维度和童年创伤来识别个体亚群:一项潜在剖面分析。","authors":"H Delamain, R Saunders, M Tanzer, P Luyten, P Fonagy, C Campbell","doi":"10.1016/j.jpsychires.2024.12.033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The present study examines the interplay between epistemic stance, attachment dimensions, and childhood trauma in relation to specific demographic factors and mental health outcomes. This study aims to understand how these factors form distinct profiles among individuals, to identify those at risk of mental health concerns.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) was employed on a dataset from the general population (n = 500) to identify subgroups of individuals based on their epistemic stance (mistrust and credulity), attachment dimensions, and childhood trauma. Group comparison tests examined differences in sociodemographic variables across the profiles, whilst linear regression analyses investigated between-profile variations in mental health and wellbeing measures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The LPA revealed a four-profile solution as the most suitable fit for the data. The latent profiles were characterised as follows: LP1 (14% of the sample; high levels of mistrust and low scores on all other measures), LP2 (62% of the sample; average scores on all measures), LP3 (15% of the sample; highest scores on all measures), and LP4 (9% of the sample; lowest scores on all measures). Between-profile significant differences were found for relationship status and education levels. Linear regression analyses demonstrated variations across the profiles for mental health symptoms and wellbeing measures.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study identified four distinct profiles with specific combinations of epistemic stance, attachment dimensions, and childhood trauma. These profiles were associated with differing levels of mental health symptom severity and wellbeing, suggesting their potential utility in informing preventive strategies targeting individuals at highest risk of negative outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":16868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of psychiatric research","volume":"181 ","pages":"701-708"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Identifying subgroups of individuals based on their epistemic stance, attachment dimensions and childhood trauma: A latent profile analysis.\",\"authors\":\"H Delamain, R Saunders, M Tanzer, P Luyten, P Fonagy, C Campbell\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jpsychires.2024.12.033\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The present study examines the interplay between epistemic stance, attachment dimensions, and childhood trauma in relation to specific demographic factors and mental health outcomes. This study aims to understand how these factors form distinct profiles among individuals, to identify those at risk of mental health concerns.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) was employed on a dataset from the general population (n = 500) to identify subgroups of individuals based on their epistemic stance (mistrust and credulity), attachment dimensions, and childhood trauma. Group comparison tests examined differences in sociodemographic variables across the profiles, whilst linear regression analyses investigated between-profile variations in mental health and wellbeing measures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The LPA revealed a four-profile solution as the most suitable fit for the data. The latent profiles were characterised as follows: LP1 (14% of the sample; high levels of mistrust and low scores on all other measures), LP2 (62% of the sample; average scores on all measures), LP3 (15% of the sample; highest scores on all measures), and LP4 (9% of the sample; lowest scores on all measures). Between-profile significant differences were found for relationship status and education levels. Linear regression analyses demonstrated variations across the profiles for mental health symptoms and wellbeing measures.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study identified four distinct profiles with specific combinations of epistemic stance, attachment dimensions, and childhood trauma. These profiles were associated with differing levels of mental health symptom severity and wellbeing, suggesting their potential utility in informing preventive strategies targeting individuals at highest risk of negative outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16868,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of psychiatric research\",\"volume\":\"181 \",\"pages\":\"701-708\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of psychiatric research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2024.12.033\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/12/22 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of psychiatric research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2024.12.033","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Identifying subgroups of individuals based on their epistemic stance, attachment dimensions and childhood trauma: A latent profile analysis.
Background: The present study examines the interplay between epistemic stance, attachment dimensions, and childhood trauma in relation to specific demographic factors and mental health outcomes. This study aims to understand how these factors form distinct profiles among individuals, to identify those at risk of mental health concerns.
Method: Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) was employed on a dataset from the general population (n = 500) to identify subgroups of individuals based on their epistemic stance (mistrust and credulity), attachment dimensions, and childhood trauma. Group comparison tests examined differences in sociodemographic variables across the profiles, whilst linear regression analyses investigated between-profile variations in mental health and wellbeing measures.
Results: The LPA revealed a four-profile solution as the most suitable fit for the data. The latent profiles were characterised as follows: LP1 (14% of the sample; high levels of mistrust and low scores on all other measures), LP2 (62% of the sample; average scores on all measures), LP3 (15% of the sample; highest scores on all measures), and LP4 (9% of the sample; lowest scores on all measures). Between-profile significant differences were found for relationship status and education levels. Linear regression analyses demonstrated variations across the profiles for mental health symptoms and wellbeing measures.
Conclusions: This study identified four distinct profiles with specific combinations of epistemic stance, attachment dimensions, and childhood trauma. These profiles were associated with differing levels of mental health symptom severity and wellbeing, suggesting their potential utility in informing preventive strategies targeting individuals at highest risk of negative outcomes.
期刊介绍:
Founded in 1961 to report on the latest work in psychiatry and cognate disciplines, the Journal of Psychiatric Research is dedicated to innovative and timely studies of four important areas of research:
(1) clinical studies of all disciplines relating to psychiatric illness, as well as normal human behaviour, including biochemical, physiological, genetic, environmental, social, psychological and epidemiological factors;
(2) basic studies pertaining to psychiatry in such fields as neuropsychopharmacology, neuroendocrinology, electrophysiology, genetics, experimental psychology and epidemiology;
(3) the growing application of clinical laboratory techniques in psychiatry, including imagery and spectroscopy of the brain, molecular biology and computer sciences;