Protocol for a randomized controlled trial examining multilevel prediction of response to behavioral activation and exposure-based therapy for generalized anxiety disorder.

BACKGROUND:Only 40-60% of patients with generalized anxiety disorder experience long-lasting improvement with gold standard psychosocial interventions. Identifying neurobehavioral factors that predict treatment success might provide specific targets for more individualized interventions, fostering more optimal outcomes and bringing us closer to the goal of "personalized medicine." Research suggests that reward and threat processing (approach/avoidance behavior) and cognitive control may be important for understanding anxiety and comorbid depressive disorders and may have relevance to treatment outcomes. This study was designed to determine whether approach-avoidance behaviors and associated neural responses moderate treatment response to exposure-based versus behavioral activation therapy for generalized anxiety disorder. METHODS/DESIGN:We are conducting a randomized controlled trial involving two 10-week group-based interventions: exposure-based therapy or behavioral activation therapy. These interventions focus on specific and unique aspects of threat and reward processing, respectively. Prior to and after treatment, participants are interviewed and undergo behavioral, biomarker, and neuroimaging assessments, with a focus on approach and avoidance processing and decision-making. Primary analyses will use mixed models to examine whether hypothesized approach, avoidance, and conflict arbitration behaviors and associated neural responses at baseline moderate symptom change with treatment, as assessed using the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 item scale. Exploratory analyses will examine additional potential treatment moderators and use data reduction and machine learning methods. DISCUSSION:This protocol provides a framework for how studies may be designed to move the field toward neuroscience-informed and personalized psychosocial treatments. The results of this trial will have implications for approach-avoidance processing in generalized anxiety disorder, relationships between levels of analysis (i.e., behavioral, neural), and predictors of behavioral therapy outcome. TRIAL REGISTRATION:The study was retrospectively registered within 21 days of first participant enrollment in accordance with FDAAA 801 with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02807480. Registered on June 21, 2016, before results

Chronic and episodic interpersonal stress as statistically unique predictors of depression in two samples of emerging adults.

Few studies comprehensively evaluate which types of life stress are most strongly associated with depressive episode onsets, over and above other forms of stress, and comparisons between acute and chronic stress are particularly lacking. Past research implicates major (moderate to severe) stressful life events (SLEs), and to a lesser extent, interpersonal forms of stress; research conflicts on whether dependent or independent SLEs are more potent, but theory favors dependent SLEs. The present study used 5 years of annual diagnostic and life stress interviews of chronic stress and SLEs from 2 separate samples (Sample 1 N = 432; Sample 2 N = 146) transitioning into emerging adulthood; 1 sample also collected early adversity interviews. Multivariate analyses simultaneously examined multiple forms of life stress to test hypotheses that all major SLEs, then particularly interpersonal forms of stress, and then dependent SLEs would contribute unique variance to major depressive episode (MDE) onsets. Person-month survival analysis consistently implicated chronic interpersonal stress and major interpersonal SLEs as statistically unique predictors of risk for MDE onset. In addition, follow-up analyses demonstrated temporal precedence for chronic stress; tested differences by gender; showed that recent chronic stress mediates the relationship between adolescent adversity and later MDE onsets; and revealed interactions of several forms of stress with socioeconomic status (SES). Specifically, as SES declined, there was an increasing role for noninterpersonal chronic stress and noninterpersonal major SLEs, coupled with a decreasing role for interpersonal chronic stress. Implications for future etiological research were discussed

Refining the Candidate Environment: Interpersonal Stress, the Serotonin Transporter Polymorphism, and Gene-Environment Interactions in Major Depression.

Meta-analytic evidence supports a gene-environment (G×E) interaction between life stress and the serotonin transporter polymorphism (5-HTTLPR) on depression, but few studies have examined factors that influence detection of this effect, despite years of inconsistent results. We propose that the "candidate environment" (akin to a candidate gene) is key. Theory and evidence implicate major stressful life events (SLEs)-particularly major interpersonal SLEs-as well as chronic family stress. Participants (N = 400) from the Youth Emotion Project (which began with 627 high school juniors oversampled for high neuroticism) completed up to five annual diagnostic and life stress interviews and provided DNA samples. A significant G×E effect for major SLEs and S-carrier genotype was accounted for significantly by major interpersonal SLEs but not significantly by major non-interpersonal SLEs. S-carrier genotype and chronic family stress also significantly interacted. Identifying such candidate environments may facilitate future G×E research in depression and psychopathology more broadly

Validating New Summary Indices for the Childhood Trauma Interview: Associations with First Onsets of Major Depressive Disorder and Anxiety Disorders

Childhood and adolescent adversity is of great interest in relation to risk for psychopathology, and interview measures of adversity are thought to be more reliable and valid than their questionnaire counterparts. One interview measure, the Childhood Trauma Interview (CTI; Fink et al., 1995), has been positively evaluated relative to similar measures, but there are some psychometric limitations to an existing scoring approach that limit the full potential of this measure. We propose several new summary indices for the CTI that permit examination of different types of adversity and different developmental periods. Our approach creates several summary indices: one sums the severity scores of adversities endorsed; another utilizes the number of minor and major (moderate to severe) adversities. The new indices were examined in association with first onsets of major depressive disorder (MDD) and anxiety disorders across a 5-year period using annual clinical diagnostic interviews (Structured Clinical Interview for DSM–IV–TR). Summary scores derived with the previously used approach were also examined for comparison. Data on 332 participants came from the Youth Emotion Project, a longitudinal study of risk for emotional disorders. Results support the predictive validity of the proposed summary scoring methods and indicate that several forms of major (but typically not minor) adversity are significantly associated with first onsets of MDD and anxiety disorders. Finally, multivariate regression models show that, in many instances, the new indices contributed significant unique variance predicting disorder onsets over and above the previously used summary indices

Limited validity of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) in dementia: evidence from a confirmatory factor analysis

OBJECTIVES: The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) is a well-validated, self-report measure of both anxiety and depression. It is frequently used with people with dementia. However, its structural validity has never been examined in this population. The current study used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to assess this. METHODS: Baseline data from two intervention studies for people with mild to moderate dementia were combined (N = 268). CFA was used to test whether a one, two or three factor structure best fit the data. Indices of model misspecification were examined to test for poor quality items, and models re-specified accordingly. Finally, measurement invariance across gender and different levels of cognitive impairment was assessed. RESULTS: A one-factor structure did not fit the data. Two and three factor structures fitted the data equally well. Model fit was improved by removal of two items. Measurement invariance was adequate across gender, but poor across groups with differing levels of cognitive impairment. CONCLUSION: The HADS is acceptable and feasible but difficult to interpret in a dementia population. We suggest that it should be interpreted as measuring two separate factors of anxiety and depression and not one 'distress' factor. However, two items may need to be removed, affecting cut-off scores. Poor measurement invariance means the HADS may not be a good tool for measuring differences in anxiety and depression between those with mild and those with moderate cognitive impairment

Perceived helpfulness of treatment for specific phobia: findings from the World Mental Health Surveys

BACKGROUND: Although randomized trials show that specific phobia treatments can be effective, it is unclear whether patients experience treatment as helpful in clinical practice. We investigated this issue by assessing perceived treatment helpfulness for specific phobia in a cross-national epidemiological survey. METHODS: Cross-sectional population-based WHO World Mental Health (WMH) surveys in 24 countries (n=112,507) assessed lifetime specific phobia. Respondents who met lifetime criteria were asked whether they ever received treatment they considered helpful and the number of professionals seen up to the time of receiving helpful treatment. Discrete-event survival analysis was used to calculate conditional-cumulative probabilities of obtaining helpful treatment across number of professionals seen and of persisting in help-seeking after prior unhelpful treatment. RESULTS: 23.0% of respondents reported receiving helpful treatment from the first professional seen, whereas cumulative probability of receiving helpful treatment was 85.7% after seeing up to 9 professionals. However, only 14.7% of patients persisted in seeing up to 9 professionals, resulting in the proportion of patients ever receiving helpful treatment (47.5%) being much lower than it could have been with persistence in help-seeking. Few predictors were found either of perceived helpfulness or of persistence in help-seeking after earlier unhelpful treatments. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective recall and lack of information about either types of treatments received or objective symptomatic improvements limit results. CONCLUSIONS: Despite these limitations, results suggest that helpfulness of specific phobia treatment could be increased, perhaps substantially, by increasing patient persistence in help-seeking after earlier unhelpful treatments. Improved understanding is needed of barriers to help-seeking persistence

Patients’ and Clinicians’ Views of the Psychological Components of Tinnitus Treatment That Could Inform Audiologists’ Usual Care:A Delphi Survey

Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine which components of psychological therapies are most important and appropriate to inform audiologists’ usual care for people with tinnitus. Design: A 39-member panel of patients, audiologists, hearing therapists, and psychologists completed a three-round Delphi survey to reach consensus on essential components of audiologist-delivered psychologically informed care for tinnitus. Results: Consensus (≥80% agreement) was reached on including 76 of 160 components. No components reached consensus for exclusion. The components reaching consensus were predominantly common therapeutic skills such as Socratic questioning and active listening, rather than specific techniques, for example, graded exposure therapy or cognitive restructuring. Consensus on educational components to include largely concerned psychological models of tinnitus rather than neurophysiological information. Conclusions: The results of this Delphi survey provide a tool to develop audiologists’ usual tinnitus care using components that both patients and clinicians agree are important and appropriate to be delivered by an audiologist for adults with tinnitus-related distress. Research is now necessary to test the added effects of these components when delivered by audiologists