Emotional Regulation and Interpersonal Effectiveness as Mechanisms of Change for Treatment Outcomes Within a DBT Program for Adolescents

Predictive modeling was used to identify the degree that hypothesized moderators of dialectical behavioral therapy for adolescents (DBT-A) treatment outcomes predicted anxiety and depression symptoms over time. Participants were 66 adolescents (41 girls; 25 boys) with a mean age of 15.38 years (SD = 1.51) who completed a 7-week DBT-A intervention. Analyses revealed convergent models, wherein emotion regulation and interpersonal effectiveness were substantial predictors of change in the symptoms of anxiety, F(4, 65) = 23.21, p \u3c .01, R2 = .60, and depression, F(4, 65) = 29.76, p \u3c .01, R2 = .66

Targeting self-criticism in the treatment of nonsuicidal self-injury in dialectical behavior therapy for adolescents: a randomized clinical trial

Background: The Benefits and Barriers Model proposes both benefits and barriers associated with nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) and that a negative association with the self plays a key role in the initial selection of and acute motivation for NSSI. The current investigation builds upon previous findings by assessing the added benefit of targeting self-criticism in the treatment of NSSI. Methods: Sample included 40 participants (30 females; Mage = 14.92) enrolled in dialectical behavior therapy for adolescents within a partial hospitalization program. All study participants received dialectical behavior therapy for adolescents, and those randomized to the experimental condition received an additional brief cognitive intervention developed to decrease self-criticism. Results: There was no evidence of an indirect effect of targeting self-criticism upon NSSI at post-treatment via post-treatment self-criticism (b = −0.98, p =.543); however, there was evidence of a significant interaction between treatment condition and self-criticism at pretreatment in the prediction of NSSI at post-treatment (b = 0.33, p =.030). Analyses of simple slopes indicated the conditional direct effect of targeting self-criticism varied as a function of patient’s level of self-criticism at the onset of treatment, such that individuals −1 SD below the mean (b = −5.76, p =.037) and at average pretreatment levels of self-criticism (b = −4.09, p =.042), but not + 1 SD above the mean (b = −2.42, p =.056), experienced fewer incidents of NSSI at post-treatment. Conclusions: The results of this investigation support the added benefit of targeting self-criticism in the treatment of NSSI for adolescents

ESICM LIVES 2016: part two : Milan, Italy. 1-5 October 2016.

Meeting abstrac

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

International audienceIn 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field