Epidemiologic heterogeneity of common mood and anxiety disorders over the lifecourse in the general population: a systematic review

Background Clinical evidence has long suggested there may be heterogeneity in the patterns and predictors of common mood and anxiety disorders; however, epidemiologic studies have generally treated these outcomes as homogenous entities. The objective of this study was to systematically review the epidemiologic evidence for potential patterns of heterogeneity of common mood and anxiety disorders over the lifecourse in the general population. Methods We reviewed epidemiologic studies examining heterogeneity in either the nature of symptoms experienced ( symptom syndromes ) or in patterns of symptoms over time ( symptom trajectories ). To be included, studies of syndromes were required to identify distinct symptom subtypes, and studies of trajectories were required to identify distinct longitudinal patterns of symptoms in at least three waves of follow-up. Studies based on clinical or patient populations were excluded. Results While research in this field is in its infancy, we found growing evidence that, not only can mood and anxiety disorders be differentiated by symptom syndromes and trajectories, but that the factors associated with these disorders may vary between these subtypes. Whether this reflects a causal pathway, where genetic or environmental factors influence the nature of the symptom or trajectory subtype experienced by an individual, or whether individuals with different subtypes differed in their susceptibility to different environmental factors, could not be determined. Few studies addressed issues of comorbidity or transitions in symptoms between common disorders. Conclusion Understanding the diversity of these conditions may help us identify preventable factors that are only associated with some subtypes of these common disorders

Don't fear 'fear conditioning': Methodological considerations for the design and analysis of studies on human fear acquisition, extinction, and return of fear

The so-called 'replicability crisis' has sparked methodological discussions in many areas of science in general, and in psychology in particular. This has led to recent endeavours to promote the transparency, rigour, and ultimately, replicability of research. Originating from this zeitgeist, the challenge to discuss critical issues on terminology, design, methods, and analysis considerations in fear conditioning research is taken up by this work, which involved representatives from fourteen of the major human fear conditioning laboratories in Europe. This compendium is intended to provide a basis for the development of a common procedural and terminology framework for the field of human fear conditioning. Whenever possible, we give general recommendations. When this is not feasible, we provide evidence-based guidance for methodological decisions on study design, outcome measures, and analyses. Importantly, this work is also intended to raise awareness and initiate discussions on crucial questions with respect to data collection, processing, statistical analyses, the impact of subtle procedural changes, and data reporting specifically tailored to the research on fear conditioning