中国强迫症、焦虑和抑郁障碍患者与非临床对照组“不仅仅是正确的经历”的比较。

IF 3.2 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Lijuan Yang, Daning Chen, Xiaodong Zhang, Fangfang Huang, Zhanjiang Li, Xiangyun Yang
{"title":"中国强迫症、焦虑和抑郁障碍患者与非临床对照组“不仅仅是正确的经历”的比较。","authors":"Lijuan Yang,&nbsp;Daning Chen,&nbsp;Xiaodong Zhang,&nbsp;Fangfang Huang,&nbsp;Zhanjiang Li,&nbsp;Xiangyun Yang","doi":"10.1002/cpp.2916","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>The aim of this study is to investigate the characteristics of ‘not just right experiences’ (NJREs) in patients with obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD), anxiety disorders (ADs) or major depressive disorder (MDD), compared with those of healthy controls (HCs).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Method</h3>\n \n <p>One hundred adults with OCD, 86 adults with ADs, 57 adults with MDD and 60 HCs were enrolled in the study. The Not Just Right Experiences Questionnaire Revised (NJRE-QR), Yale–Brown Obsessive–Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) were used to evaluate clinical symptoms in patients with OCD, ADs or MDD. The Obsessive Belief Questionnaire-44 (OBQ-44) was used to evaluate OC beliefs in the OCD patients. The HCs only received assessment using the NJRE-QR. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and covariance (ANCOVA) were performed to compare the NJREs scores across the groups, while Pearson correlation and partial correlation analyses were used to examine the association between NJREs and other clinical features. The contribution of NJREs to predict OC symptoms was determined by multiple stratified linear regression.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Individuals with OCD had significantly higher scores for the number of NJREs than ADs, but not MDD. The severity of NJREs was also significantly higher in patients with OCD than those with MDD or ADs (<i>F</i> = 5.23 and <i>F</i> = 19.79, respectively, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.01). All the clinical scores in the NJRE-QR were significantly higher than those in the HC group. The number and severity of NJREs correlated significantly with the Y-BOCS total score (<i>r</i> = 0.29 and <i>r</i> = 0.39, respectively, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.01). NJREs showed an independent contribution to OC symptoms, which alone explained 8% of the variation (<i>F</i> = 16.49, Δ<i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.08; <i>P</i> &lt; 0.01).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>NJREs are related closely to OC symptoms, with their severity discriminating between OCD patients and those with ADs or MDD. NJREs were more specific for OCD in the Chinese population and are therefore worthy of further study in the future.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10460,"journal":{"name":"Clinical psychology & psychotherapy","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparison of ‘not just right experiences’ in obsessive–compulsive disorder, anxiety and depressive disorders and non-clinical controls in China\",\"authors\":\"Lijuan Yang,&nbsp;Daning Chen,&nbsp;Xiaodong Zhang,&nbsp;Fangfang Huang,&nbsp;Zhanjiang Li,&nbsp;Xiangyun Yang\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/cpp.2916\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objective</h3>\\n \\n <p>The aim of this study is to investigate the characteristics of ‘not just right experiences’ (NJREs) in patients with obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD), anxiety disorders (ADs) or major depressive disorder (MDD), compared with those of healthy controls (HCs).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Method</h3>\\n \\n <p>One hundred adults with OCD, 86 adults with ADs, 57 adults with MDD and 60 HCs were enrolled in the study. The Not Just Right Experiences Questionnaire Revised (NJRE-QR), Yale–Brown Obsessive–Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) were used to evaluate clinical symptoms in patients with OCD, ADs or MDD. The Obsessive Belief Questionnaire-44 (OBQ-44) was used to evaluate OC beliefs in the OCD patients. The HCs only received assessment using the NJRE-QR. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and covariance (ANCOVA) were performed to compare the NJREs scores across the groups, while Pearson correlation and partial correlation analyses were used to examine the association between NJREs and other clinical features. The contribution of NJREs to predict OC symptoms was determined by multiple stratified linear regression.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Individuals with OCD had significantly higher scores for the number of NJREs than ADs, but not MDD. The severity of NJREs was also significantly higher in patients with OCD than those with MDD or ADs (<i>F</i> = 5.23 and <i>F</i> = 19.79, respectively, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.01). All the clinical scores in the NJRE-QR were significantly higher than those in the HC group. The number and severity of NJREs correlated significantly with the Y-BOCS total score (<i>r</i> = 0.29 and <i>r</i> = 0.39, respectively, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.01). NJREs showed an independent contribution to OC symptoms, which alone explained 8% of the variation (<i>F</i> = 16.49, Δ<i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.08; <i>P</i> &lt; 0.01).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>NJREs are related closely to OC symptoms, with their severity discriminating between OCD patients and those with ADs or MDD. NJREs were more specific for OCD in the Chinese population and are therefore worthy of further study in the future.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10460,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical psychology & psychotherapy\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical psychology & psychotherapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cpp.2916\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical psychology & psychotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cpp.2916","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在探讨强迫症(OCD)、焦虑症(AD)或重性抑郁障碍(MDD)患者与健康对照组(HC)患者的“不只是正确体验”(NJREs)特征。采用不只是正确的经历问卷修订版(NJE-QR)、Yale-Brown强迫症量表(Y-BOCS)、Beck抑郁量表(BDI)和Beck焦虑量表(BAI)评估强迫症、AD或MDD患者的临床症状。强迫症患者使用强迫症信念问卷44(OBQ-44)评估强迫症患者的强迫症信念。HC仅接受了使用NJRE-QR的评估。方差分析(ANOVA)和协方差分析(ANCOVA)用于比较各组的NJRE评分,而Pearson相关和偏相关分析用于检查NJRE与其他临床特征之间的相关性。NJRE对OC症状的预测作用通过多元分层线性回归确定。结果:强迫症患者的NJRE数量得分明显高于AD,但MDD得分不高。强迫症患者的NJRE严重程度也显著高于MDD或AD患者(F = 5.23和F = 分别为19.79,P 2. = 0.08;P 结论:NJREs与强迫症症状密切相关,其严重程度可区分强迫症患者和AD或MDD患者。NJRE在中国人群中对强迫症更具特异性,因此值得未来进一步研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A comparison of ‘not just right experiences’ in obsessive–compulsive disorder, anxiety and depressive disorders and non-clinical controls in China

Objective

The aim of this study is to investigate the characteristics of ‘not just right experiences’ (NJREs) in patients with obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD), anxiety disorders (ADs) or major depressive disorder (MDD), compared with those of healthy controls (HCs).

Method

One hundred adults with OCD, 86 adults with ADs, 57 adults with MDD and 60 HCs were enrolled in the study. The Not Just Right Experiences Questionnaire Revised (NJRE-QR), Yale–Brown Obsessive–Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) were used to evaluate clinical symptoms in patients with OCD, ADs or MDD. The Obsessive Belief Questionnaire-44 (OBQ-44) was used to evaluate OC beliefs in the OCD patients. The HCs only received assessment using the NJRE-QR. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and covariance (ANCOVA) were performed to compare the NJREs scores across the groups, while Pearson correlation and partial correlation analyses were used to examine the association between NJREs and other clinical features. The contribution of NJREs to predict OC symptoms was determined by multiple stratified linear regression.

Results

Individuals with OCD had significantly higher scores for the number of NJREs than ADs, but not MDD. The severity of NJREs was also significantly higher in patients with OCD than those with MDD or ADs (F = 5.23 and F = 19.79, respectively, P < 0.01). All the clinical scores in the NJRE-QR were significantly higher than those in the HC group. The number and severity of NJREs correlated significantly with the Y-BOCS total score (r = 0.29 and r = 0.39, respectively, P < 0.01). NJREs showed an independent contribution to OC symptoms, which alone explained 8% of the variation (F = 16.49, ΔR2 = 0.08; P < 0.01).

Conclusion

NJREs are related closely to OC symptoms, with their severity discriminating between OCD patients and those with ADs or MDD. NJREs were more specific for OCD in the Chinese population and are therefore worthy of further study in the future.

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
Clinical psychology & psychotherapy
Clinical psychology & psychotherapy PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
5.60%
发文量
106
期刊介绍: Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy aims to keep clinical psychologists and psychotherapists up to date with new developments in their fields. The Journal will provide an integrative impetus both between theory and practice and between different orientations within clinical psychology and psychotherapy. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy will be a forum in which practitioners can present their wealth of expertise and innovations in order to make these available to a wider audience. Equally, the Journal will contain reports from researchers who want to address a larger clinical audience with clinically relevant issues and clinically valid research.
×
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