↓ Skip to main content

Transdiagnostic Symptom Clusters and Associations With Brain, Behavior, and Daily Function in Mood, Anxiety, and Trauma Disorders

Overview of attention for article published in JAMA Psychiatry, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
131 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
438 Mendeley
Title
Transdiagnostic Symptom Clusters and Associations With Brain, Behavior, and Daily Function in Mood, Anxiety, and Trauma Disorders
Published in
JAMA Psychiatry, February 2018
DOI 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2017.3951
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katherine A. Grisanzio, Andrea N. Goldstein-Piekarski, Michelle Yuyun Wang, Abdullah P. Rashed Ahmed, Zoe Samara, Leanne M. Williams

Abstract

The symptoms that define mood, anxiety, and trauma disorders are highly overlapping across disorders and heterogeneous within disorders. It is unknown whether coherent subtypes exist that span multiple diagnoses and are expressed functionally (in underlying cognition and brain function) and clinically (in daily function). The identification of cohesive subtypes would help disentangle the symptom overlap in our current diagnoses and serve as a tool for tailoring treatment choices. To propose and demonstrate 1 approach for identifying subtypes within a transdiagnostic sample. This cross-sectional study analyzed data from the Brain Research and Integrative Neuroscience Network Foundation Database that had been collected at the University of Sydney and University of Adelaide between 2006 and 2010 and replicated at Stanford University between 2013 and 2017. The study included 420 individuals with a primary diagnosis of major depressive disorder (n = 100), panic disorder (n = 53), posttraumatic stress disorder (n = 47), or no disorder (healthy control participants) (n = 220). Data were analyzed between October 2016 and October 2017. We followed a data-driven approach to achieve the primary study outcome of identifying transdiagnostic subtypes. First, machine learning with a hierarchical clustering algorithm was implemented to classify participants based on self-reported negative mood, anxiety, and stress symptoms. Second, the robustness and generalizability of the subtypes were tested in an independent sample. Third, we assessed whether symptom subtypes were expressed at behavioral and physiological levels of functioning. Fourth, we evaluated the clinically meaningful differences in functional capacity of the subtypes. Findings were interpreted relative to a complementary diagnostic frame of reference. Four hundred twenty participants with a mean (SD) age of 39.8 (14.1) years were included in the final analysis; 256 (61.0%) were female. We identified 6 distinct subtypes characterized by tension (n=81; 19%), anxious arousal (n=55; 13%), general anxiety (n=38; 9%), anhedonia (n=29; 7%), melancholia (n=37; 9%), and normative mood (n=180; 43%), and these subtypes were replicated in an independent sample. Subtypes were expressed through differences in cognitive control (F5,383 = 5.13, P < .001, ηp2 = 0.063), working memory (F5,401 = 3.29, P = .006, ηp2 = 0.039), electroencephalography-recorded β power in a resting paradigm (F5,357 = 3.84, P = .002, ηp2 = 0.051), electroencephalography-recorded β power in an emotional paradigm (F5,365 = 3.56, P = .004, ηp2 = 0.047), social functional capacity (F5,414 = 21.33, P < .001, ηp2 = 0.205), and emotional resilience (F5,376 = 15.10, P < .001, ηp2 = 0.171). These findings offer a data-driven framework for identifying robust subtypes that signify specific, coherent, meaningful associations between symptoms, behavior, brain function, and observable real-world function, and that cut across DSM-IV-defined diagnoses of major depressive disorder, panic disorder, and posttraumatic stress disorder.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 211 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 438 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 438 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 70 16%
Researcher 58 13%
Student > Master 40 9%
Student > Bachelor 39 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 30 7%
Other 67 15%
Unknown 134 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 107 24%
Neuroscience 51 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 51 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 3%
Computer Science 11 3%
Other 46 11%
Unknown 159 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 319. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 January 2023.
All research outputs
#108,137
of 25,836,587 outputs
Outputs from JAMA Psychiatry
#305
of 5,953 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,638
of 451,858 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA Psychiatry
#9
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,836,587 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,953 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 71.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 451,858 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 71 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.