1
|
Wigman JTW, van der Tuin S, van den Berg D, Muller MK, Booij SH. Mental health, risk and protective factors at micro- and macro-levels across early at-risk stages for psychosis: The Mirorr study. Early Interv Psychiatry 2022; 17:478-494. [PMID: 36198658 DOI: 10.1111/eip.13343] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/05/2021] [Revised: 02/16/2022] [Accepted: 07/05/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The clinical staging model states that psychosis develops through subsequent stages of illness severity. To better understand what drives illness progression, more extensive comparison across clinical stages is needed. The current paper presents an in-depth characterization of individuals with different levels of risk for psychosis (i.e., different early clinical stages), using a multimethod approach of cross-sectional assessments and daily diary reports. METHODS Data came from the Mirorr study that includes N = 96 individuals, divided across four subgroups (n1 = 25, n2 = 27, n3 = 24, and n4 = 20). These subgroups, each with an increasing risk for psychosis, represent clinical stages 0-1b. Cross-sectional data and 90-day daily diary data on psychopathology, well-being, psychosocial functioning, risk and protective factors were statistically compared across subgroups (stages) and descriptively compared across domains and assessment methods. RESULTS Psychopathology increased across subgroups, although not always linearly and nuanced differences were seen between assessment methods. Well-being and functioning differed mostly between subgroup 1 and the other subgroups, suggesting differences between non-clinical and clinical populations. Risk and protective factors differed mostly between the two highest and lowest subgroups, especially regarding need of social support and coping, suggesting differences between those with and without substantial psychotic experiences. Subgroup 4 (stage 1b) reported especially high levels of daily positive and negative psychotic experiences. CONCLUSIONS Risk for psychosis exists in larger contexts of mental health and factors of risk and protection that differ across stages and assessment methods. Taking a broad, multi-method approach is an important next step to understand the complex development of youth mental health problems.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Johanna T W Wigman
- Department of Psychiatry, Interdisciplinary Centre for Psychopathology and Emotion Regulation, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.,Department of Psychiatry, Rob Giel Onderzoekscentrum, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Sara van der Tuin
- Department of Psychiatry, Interdisciplinary Centre for Psychopathology and Emotion Regulation, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - David van den Berg
- Department of Clinical Psychology, VU University and Amsterdam Public Health Research, The Netherlands.,Department of Psychosis Research, Parnassia Psychiatric Institute, The Hague, The Netherlands
| | - Merel K Muller
- Department of Psychiatry, Interdisciplinary Centre for Psychopathology and Emotion Regulation, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Sanne H Booij
- Department of Psychiatry, Interdisciplinary Centre for Psychopathology and Emotion Regulation, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.,Faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences, Department of Developmental Psychology, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.,Center for Integrative Psychiatry, Lentis, Groningen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Scott J, Crouse JJ, Ho N, Iorfino F, Martin N, Parker R, McGrath J, Gillespie NA, Medland S, Hickie IB. Early expressions of psychopathology and risk associated with trans-diagnostic transition to mood and psychotic disorders in adolescents and young adults. PLoS One 2021; 16:e0252550. [PMID: 34086749 PMCID: PMC8177455 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0252550] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/05/2021] [Accepted: 05/17/2021] [Indexed: 02/03/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The heterogeneity and comorbidity of major mental disorders presenting in adolescents and young adults has fostered calls for trans-diagnostic research. This study examines early expressions of psychopathology and risk and trans-diagnostic caseness in a community cohort of twins and non-twin siblings. METHODS Using data from the Brisbane Longitudinal Twin Study, we estimated median number of self-rated psychiatric symptoms, prevalence of subthreshold syndromes, family history of mood and/or psychotic disorders, and likelihood of subsequent trans-diagnostic caseness (individuals meeting diagnostic criteria for mood and/or psychotic syndromes). Next, we used cross-validated Chi-Square Automatic Interaction Detector (CHAID) analyses to identify the nature and relative importance of individual self-rated symptoms that predicted trans-diagnostic caseness. We examined the positive and negative predictive values (PPV; NPV) and accuracy of all classifications (Area under the Curve and 95% confidence intervals: AUC; 95% CI). RESULTS Of 1815 participants (Female 1050, 58%; mean age 26.40), more than one in four met caseness criteria for a mood and/or psychotic disorder. Examination of individual factors indicated that the AUC was highest for subthreshold syndromes, followed by family history then self-rated psychiatric symptoms, and that NPV always exceeded PPV for caseness. In contrast, the CHAID analysis (adjusted for age, sex, twin status) generated a classification tree comprising six trans-diagnostic symptoms. Whilst the contribution of two symptoms (need for sleep; physical activity) to the model was more difficult to interpret, CHAID analysis indicated that four self-rated symptoms (sadness; feeling overwhelmed; impaired concentration; paranoia) offered the best discrimination between cases and non-cases. These four symptoms showed different associations with family history status. CONCLUSIONS The findings need replication in independent cohorts. However, the use of CHAID might provide a means of identifying specific subsets of trans-diagnostic symptoms representing clinical phenotypes that predict transition to caseness in individuals at risk of onset of major mental disorders.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jan Scott
- Brain and Mind Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
- Institute of Neuroscience, Newcastle University, Newcastle, United Kingdom
- * E-mail:
| | - Jacob J. Crouse
- Brain and Mind Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Nicholas Ho
- Brain and Mind Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Frank Iorfino
- Brain and Mind Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Nicholas Martin
- QIMR Berghofer Institute of Medical Research, Brisbane, Australia
| | - Richard Parker
- QIMR Berghofer Institute of Medical Research, Brisbane, Australia
| | - John McGrath
- QIMR Berghofer Institute of Medical Research, Brisbane, Australia
| | - Nathan A. Gillespie
- Virginia Institute for Psychiatric and Behavioral Genetics, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, United States of America
| | - Sarah Medland
- QIMR Berghofer Institute of Medical Research, Brisbane, Australia
- Institute of Molecular Bioscience, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
| | - Ian B. Hickie
- Brain and Mind Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Kuranova A, Booij SH, Oldehinkel AJ, Wichers M, Jeronimus B, Wigman JTW. Reflections on psychological resilience: a comparison of three conceptually different operationalizations in predicting mental health. Eur J Psychotraumatol 2021; 12:1956802. [PMID: 34589174 PMCID: PMC8475143 DOI: 10.1080/20008198.2021.1956802] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Psychological resilience refers to the ability to maintain mental health or recover quickly after stress. Despite the popularity of resilience research, there is no consensus understanding or operationalization of resilience. OBJECTIVE We plan to compare three indicators of resilience that each involve a different operationalization of the construct: a) General resilience or one's self-reported general ability to overcome adversities; b) Daily resilience as momentarily experienced ability to overcome adversities; and c) Recovery speed evident in the pattern of negative affect recovery after small adversities in daily life. These three indicators are constructed per person to investigate their cross-sectional associations, stability over time, and predictive validity regarding mental health. METHODS Data will be derived from the prospective MIRORR study that comprises 96 individuals at different levels of psychosis risk and contains both single-time assessed questionnaires and 90-days intensive longitudinal data collection at baseline (T0) and three yearly follow-up waves (T1-T3). General resilience is assessed using the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) at baseline. Daily resilience is measured by averaging daily resilience scores across 90 days. For recovery speed, vector-autoregressive models with consecutive impulse response simulations will be applied to diary data on negative affect and daily stressors to calculate pattern of affect recovery. These indicators will be correlated concurrently (at T0) to assess their overlap and prospectively (between T0 and T1) to estimate their stability. Their predictive potential will be assessed by regression analysis with mental health (SCL-90) as an outcome, resilience indicators as predictors, and stressful life events as a moderator. CONCLUSION The comparison of different conceptualizations of psychological resilience can increase our understanding of its multifaceted nature and, in future, help improve diagnostic, prevention and intervention strategies aimed at increasing psychological resilience.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna Kuranova
- Interdisciplinary Center Psychopathology and Emotion Regulation (ICPE), University Medical Center Groningen, University Center Psychiatry (UCP), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Sanne H Booij
- Interdisciplinary Center Psychopathology and Emotion Regulation (ICPE), University Medical Center Groningen, University Center Psychiatry (UCP), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.,Department of Research and Education, Friesland Mental Health Care Services, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands.,Center for Integrative Psychiatry, Lentis, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Albertine J Oldehinkel
- Interdisciplinary Center Psychopathology and Emotion Regulation (ICPE), University Medical Center Groningen, University Center Psychiatry (UCP), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Marieke Wichers
- Interdisciplinary Center Psychopathology and Emotion Regulation (ICPE), University Medical Center Groningen, University Center Psychiatry (UCP), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Bertus Jeronimus
- Department of Developmental Psychology, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Johanna T W Wigman
- Interdisciplinary Center Psychopathology and Emotion Regulation (ICPE), University Medical Center Groningen, University Center Psychiatry (UCP), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.,Department of Research and Education, Friesland Mental Health Care Services, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Wigman JTW, Pijnenborg GHM, Bruggeman R, Vos M, Wessels A, Oosterholt I, Nauta M, Stelwagen R, Otto L, Wester A, Wunderink L, Sportel E, Boonstra N. Onset and transition of and recovery from adverse development: Study methodology. Early Interv Psychiatry 2020; 14:568-576. [PMID: 31691504 PMCID: PMC7496076 DOI: 10.1111/eip.12882] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/23/2018] [Revised: 08/07/2019] [Accepted: 09/24/2019] [Indexed: 01/26/2023]
Abstract
AIM Early intervention programs for first-episode psychosis have led to the awareness that the period before onset of a first episode is important in light of early intervention. This has induced a focus on the so-called 'at risk mental state' (ARMS). Individuals with ARMS are at increased risk for later psychotic disorder, but also for other psychiatric disorders as well as poor psychosocial functioning. Thus, adequate detection and treatment of ARMS is essential. METHODS Since 2018, screening for and treatment of ARMS is recommended standard care in the Netherlands. Implementation is still ongoing. We initiated a naturalistic long-term cohort study of ARMS individuals, the onset and transition of and recovery from adverse development (OnTheROAD) study, with the aim to monitor course and outcome of symptoms and psychosocial functioning over time, as well as patterns of comorbidity and associations with factors of risk and resilience. To this end, participants complete a broad battery of instruments at baseline and yearly follow-up assessments up to 3 years. Outcome is defined in terms of symptom severity level, functioning and quality of life. In particular, we aim to investigate the impact of negative symptoms as part of the ARMS concept. Results from this study can aid in refining the existing ARMS criteria, understanding the developmental course of ARMS and investigating the hypothesized pluripotentiality in outcome of ARMS. New knowledge may inform the further development of specialized early interventions. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS In this article, we describe the rationale, outline and set-up of OnTheROAD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Johanna T W Wigman
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Rob Giel Research Centre (RGOc), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Gerdina H M Pijnenborg
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Rob Giel Research Centre (RGOc), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.,Department of Psychology, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.,GGZ (Mental Health Organization) Drenthe, Assen, The Netherlands
| | - Richard Bruggeman
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Rob Giel Research Centre (RGOc), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Maarten Vos
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Rob Giel Research Centre (RGOc), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Anita Wessels
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Rob Giel Research Centre (RGOc), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.,Mediant Mental Health Organization, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - Inez Oosterholt
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Rob Giel Research Centre (RGOc), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.,Dimence Mental Health Organization, Deventer, The Netherlands
| | - Maaike Nauta
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Rob Giel Research Centre (RGOc), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.,Department of Psychology, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.,Accare Youth Mental Health Organization, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Renee Stelwagen
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Rob Giel Research Centre (RGOc), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Lana Otto
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Rob Giel Research Centre (RGOc), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Anniek Wester
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Rob Giel Research Centre (RGOc), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Lex Wunderink
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Rob Giel Research Centre (RGOc), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.,Mental Health Organization Friesland, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands
| | - Esther Sportel
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Rob Giel Research Centre (RGOc), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.,GGZ (Mental Health Organization) Drenthe, Assen, The Netherlands
| | - Nynke Boonstra
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Rob Giel Research Centre (RGOc), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.,Mental Health Organization Friesland, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|