Examining contemporaneous and temporal associations of real-time suicidal ideation using network analysis.

BACKGROUND: Suicidal ideation arises from a complex interplay of multiple interacting risk factors over time. Recently, ecological momentary assessment (EMA) has increased our understanding of factors associated with real-time suicidal ideation, as well as those predicting ideation at the level of hours and days. Here we used statistical network methods to investigate which cognitive-affective risk and protective factors are associated with the temporal dynamics of suicidal ideation. METHODS: The SAFE study is a longitudinal cohort study of 82 participants with current suicidal ideation who completed 4×/day EMA over 21 days. We modeled contemporaneous (t) and temporal (t + 1) associations of three suicidal ideation components (passive ideation, active ideation, and acquired capability) and their predictors (positive and negative affect, anxiety, hopelessness, loneliness, burdensomeness, and optimism) using multilevel vector auto-regression models. RESULTS: Contemporaneously, passive suicidal ideation was positively associated with sadness, hopelessness, loneliness, and burdensomeness, and negatively with happiness, calmness, and optimism; active suicidal ideation was positively associated with passive suicidal ideation, sadness, and shame; and acquired capability only with passive and active suicidal ideation. Acquired capability and hopelessness positively predicted passive ideation at t + 1, which in turn predicted active ideation; acquired capability was positively predicted at t + 1 by shame, and negatively by burdensomeness. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that systematic real-time associations exist between suicidal ideation and its predictors, and that different factors may uniquely influence distinct components of ideation. These factors may represent important targets for safety planning and risk detection.

A narrative systematic review of changes in mental health symptoms from before to during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic raised concerns regarding population-wide impacts on mental health. Existing work on the psychological impacts of disaster has identified the potential for multiple response trajectories, with resilience as likely as the development of chronic psychopathology. Early reviews of mental health during the pandemic suggested elevated prevalence rates of multiple forms of psychopathology, but were limited by largely cross-sectional approaches. We conducted a systematic review of studies that prospectively assessed pre- to peri-pandemic changes in symptoms of psychopathology to investigate potential mental health changes associated with the onset of the pandemic (PROSPERO #CRD42021255042). A total of 97 studies were included, covering symptom clusters including obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), fear, anxiety, depression, and general distress. Changes in psychopathology symptoms varied by symptom dimension and sample characteristics. OCD, anxiety, depression, and general distress symptoms tended to increase from pre- to peri-pandemic. An increase in fear was limited to medically vulnerable participants, and findings for PTSD were mixed. Pre-existing mental health diagnoses unexpectedly were not associated with symptom exacerbation, except in the case of OCD. Young people generally showed the most marked symptom increases, although this pattern was reversed in some samples. Women in middle adulthood in particular demonstrated a considerable increase in anxiety and depression. We conclude that mental health responding during the pandemic varied as a function of both symptom cluster and sample characteristics. Variability in responding should therefore be a key consideration guiding future research and intervention.

Elemental psychopathology: distilling constituent symptoms and patterns of repetition in the diagnostic criteria of the DSM-5.

BACKGROUND: The DSM-5 features hundreds of diagnoses comprising a multitude of symptoms, and there is considerable repetition in the symptoms among diagnoses. This repetition undermines what we can learn from studying individual diagnostic constructs because it can obscure both disorder- and symptom-specific signals. However, these lost opportunities are currently veiled because symptom repetition in the DSM-5 has not been quantified. METHOD: This descriptive study mapped the repetition among the 1419 symptoms described in 202 diagnoses of adult psychopathology in section II of the DSM-5. Over a million possible symptom comparisons needed to be conducted, for which we used both qualitative content coding and natural language processing. RESULTS: In total, we identified 628 distinct symptoms: 397 symptoms (63.2%) were unique to a single diagnosis, whereas 231 symptoms (36.8%) repeated across multiple diagnoses a total of 1022 times (median 3 times per symptom; range 2-22). Some chapters had more repetition than others: For example, every symptom of every diagnosis in the bipolar and related disorders chapter was repeated in other chapters, but there was no repetition for any symptoms of any diagnoses in the elimination disorders, gender dysphoria or paraphilic disorders. The most frequently repeated symptoms included insomnia, difficulty concentrating, and irritability - listed in 22, 17 and 16 diagnoses, respectively. Notably, the top 15 most frequently repeating diagnostic criteria were dominated by symptoms of major depressive disorder. CONCLUSION: Overall, our findings lay the foundation for a better understanding of the extent and potential consequences of symptom overlap.

A Network Study of Family Affect Systems in Daily Life.

Adolescence is a time period characterized by extremes in affect and increasing prevalence of mental health problems. Prior studies have illustrated how affect states of adolescents are related to interactions with parents. However, it remains unclear how affect states among family triads, that is adolescents and their parents, are related in daily life. This study investigated affect state dynamics (happy, sad, relaxed, and irritated) of 60 family triads, including 60 adolescents (Mage = 15.92, 63.3% females), fathers and mothers (Mage = 49.16). The families participated in the RE-PAIR study, where they reported their affect states in four ecological momentary assessments per day for 14 days. First, we used multilevel vector-autoregressive network models to estimate affect dynamics across all families, and for each family individually. Resulting models elucidated how family affect states were related at the same moment, and over time. We identified relations from parents to adolescents and vice versa, while considering family variation in these relations. Second, we evaluated the statistical performance of the network model via a simulation study, varying the percentage missing data, the number of families, and the number of time points. We conclude with substantive and statistical recommendations for future research on family affect dynamics.

Introducing FRED: Software for Generating Feedback Reports for Ecological Momentary Assessment Data.

Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) is a data collection approach utilizing smartphone applications or wearable devices to gather insights into daily life. EMA has advantages over traditional surveys, such as increasing ecological validity. However, especially prolonged data collection can burden participants by disrupting their everyday activities. Consequently, EMA studies can have comparably high rates of missing data and face problems of compliance. Giving participants access to their data via accessible feedback reports, as seen in citizen science initiatives, may increase participant motivation. Existing frameworks to generate such reports focus on single individuals in clinical settings and do not scale well to large datasets. Here, we introduce FRED (Feedback Reports on EMA Data) to tackle the challenge of providing personalized reports to many participants. FRED is an interactive online tool in which participants can explore their own personalized data reports. We showcase FRED using data from the WARN-D study, where 867 participants were queried for 85 consecutive days with four daily and one weekly survey, resulting in up to 352 observations per participant. FRED includes descriptive statistics, time-series visualizations, and network analyses on selected EMA variables. Participants can access the reports online as part of a Shiny app, developed via the R programming language. We make the code and infrastructure of FRED available in the hope that it will be useful for both research and clinical settings, given that it can be flexibly adapted to the needs of other projects with the goal of generating personalized data reports.

Computational Psychiatry Needs Time and Context.

Why has computational psychiatry yet to influence routine clinical practice? One reason may be that it has neglected context and temporal dynamics in the models of certain mental health problems. We develop three heuristics for estimating whether time and context are important to a mental health problem: Is it characterized by a core neurobiological mechanism? Does it follow a straightforward natural trajectory? And is intentional mental content peripheral to the problem? For many problems the answers are no, suggesting that modeling time and context is critical. We review computational psychiatry advances toward this end, including modeling state variation, using domain-specific stimuli, and interpreting differences in context. We discuss complementary network and complex systems approaches. Novel methods and unification with adjacent fields may inspire a new generation of computational psychiatry.

Reviewing the genetics of heterogeneity in depression: operationalizations, manifestations and etiologies.

With progress in genome-wide association studies of depression, from identifying zero hits in ~16 000 individuals in 2013 to 223 hits in more than a million individuals in 2020, understanding the genetic architecture of this debilitating condition no longer appears to be an impossible task. The pressing question now is whether recently discovered variants describe the etiology of a single disease entity. There are a myriad of ways to measure and operationalize depression severity, and major depressive disorder as defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5 can manifest in more than 10 000 ways based on symptom profiles alone. Variations in developmental timing, comorbidity and environmental contexts across individuals and samples further add to the heterogeneity. With big data increasingly enabling genomic discovery in psychiatry, it is more timely than ever to explicitly disentangle genetic contributions to what is likely 'depressions' rather than depression. Here, we introduce three sources of heterogeneity: operationalization, manifestation and etiology. We review recent efforts to identify depression subtypes using clinical and data-driven approaches, examine differences in genetic architecture of depression across contexts, and argue that heterogeneity in operationalizations of depression is likely a considerable source of inconsistency. Finally, we offer recommendations and considerations for the field going forward.

A topography of 21 phobic fears: network analysis in an epidemiological sample of adult twins.

BACKGROUND: Few factor analyses and no network analyses have examined the structure of DSM phobic fears or tested the specificity of the relationship between panic disorder and agoraphobic fears. METHODS: Histories of 21 lifetime phobic fears, coded as four-level ordinal variables (no fear to fear with major interference) were assessed at personal interview in 7514 adults from the Virginia Twin Registry. We estimated Gaussian Graphical Models on individual phobic fears; compared network structures of women and men using the Network Comparison Test; used community detection to determine the number and nature of groups in which phobic fears hang together; and validated the anticipated specific relationship between panic disorder and agoraphobia. RESULTS: All networks were densely and positively inter-connected; networks of women and men were structurally similar. Our most frequent and stable solution identified four phobic clusters: (i) blood-injection, (ii) social-agoraphobia, (iii) situational, and (iv) animal-disease. Fear of public restrooms and of diseases clustered with animal and not, respectively, social and blood-injury phobias. When added to the network, the three strongest connections with lifetime panic disorder were all agoraphobic fears: being in crowds, going out of the house alone, and being in open spaces. CONCLUSIONS: Using network analyses applied to a large epidemiologic twin sample, we broadly validated the DSM-IV typography but did not entirely support the distinction of agoraphobic and social phobic fears or the DSM placements for fears of public restrooms and diseases. We found strong support for the specificity of the relationship between panic disorder and agoraphobic fears.

Common measures or common metrics? A plea to harmonize measurement results.

OBJECTIVE: There is a great variety of measurement instruments to assess similar constructs in clinical research and practice. This complicates the interpretation of test results and hampers the implementation of measurement-based care. METHOD: For reporting and discussing test results with patients, we suggest converting test results into universally applicable common metrics. Two well-established metrics are reviewed: T scores and percentile ranks. Their calculation is explained, their merits and drawbacks are discussed, and recommendations for the most convenient reference group are provided. RESULTS: We propose to express test results as T scores with the general population as reference group. To elucidate test results to patients, T scores may be supplemented with percentile ranks, based on data from a clinical sample. The practical benefits are demonstrated using the published data of four frequently used instruments for measuring depression: the CES-D, PHQ-9, BDI-II and the PROMIS depression measure. DISCUSSION: Recent initiatives have proposed to mandate a limited set of outcome measures to harmonize clinical measurement. However, the selected instruments are not without flaws and, potentially, this directive may hamper future instrument development. We recommend using common metrics as an alternative approach to harmonize test results in clinical practice, as this will facilitate the integration of measures in day-to-day practice.