The Stress Phenotyping Framework: A multidisciplinary biobehavioral approach for assessing and therapeutically targeting maladaptive stress physiology

AbstractAlthough dysregulated stress biology is becoming increasingly recognized as a key driver of lifelong disparities in chronic disease, we presently have no validated biomarkers of toxic stress physiology; no biological, behavioral, or cognitive treatments specifically focused on normalizing toxic stress processes; and no agreed-upon guidelines for treating stress in the clinic or evaluating the efficacy of interventions that seek to reduce toxic stress and improve human functioning. We address these critical issues by (a) systematically describing key systems and mechanisms that are dysregulated by stress; (b) summarizing indicators, biomarkers, and instruments for assessing stress response systems; and (c) highlighting therapeutic approaches that can be used to normalize stress-related biopsychosocial functioning. We also present a novel multidisciplinary Stress Phenotyping Framework that can bring stress researchers and clinicians one step closer to realizing the goal of using precision medicine-based approaches to prevent and treat stress-associated health problems

The effect of adverse childhood experience training, screening, and response in primary care: a systematic review

BackgroundAdverse childhood experiences (ACEs) can have harmful, long-term health effects. Although primary care providers (PCPs) could help mitigate these effects, no studies have reviewed the impacts of ACE training, screening, and response in primary care.MethodsThis systematic review searched four electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, APA PsycInfo, CINAHL) for peer-reviewed articles on ACE training, screening, and/or response in primary care published between Jan 1, 1998, and May 31, 2023. Searches were limited to primary research articles in the primary care setting that reported provider-related outcomes (knowledge, confidence, screening behavior, clinical care) and/or patient-related outcomes (satisfaction, referral engagement, health outcomes). Summary data were extracted from published reports.FindingsOf 6532 records, 58 met inclusion criteria. Fifty-two reported provider-related outcomes; 21 reported patient-related outcomes. 50 included pediatric populations, 12 included adults. A majority discussed screening interventions (n = 40). Equal numbers (n = 25) discussed training and clinical response interventions. Strength of evidence (SOE) was generally low, especially for adult studies. This was due to reliance on observational evidence, small samples, and self-report measures for heterogeneous outcomes. Exceptions with moderate SOE included the effect of training interventions on provider confidence/self-efficacy and the effect of screening interventions on screening uptake and patient satisfaction.InterpretationPrimary care represents a potentially strategic setting for addressing ACEs, but evidence on patient- and provider-related outcomes remains scarce.FundingThe California Department of Health Care Services and the Office of the California Surgeon General