The Middle‐Out Approach to reconceptualizing, assessing, and analyzing traumatic stress reactions.
Saved in:
| Title: | The Middle‐Out Approach to reconceptualizing, assessing, and analyzing traumatic stress reactions. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Adams, Shane W. (AUTHOR), Layne, Christopher M. (AUTHOR), Contractor, Ateka A. (AUTHOR), Allwood, Maureen A. (AUTHOR), Armour, Chérie (AUTHOR), Inslicht, Sabra S. (AUTHOR), Maguen, Shira (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Journal of Traumatic Stress. Jun2024, Vol. 37 Issue 3, p433-447. 15p. |
| Subjects: | Harm (Ethics), Pathological psychology, Statistical models, Empirical research, Phenotypes |
| Abstract: | Alternative models of traumatic stress and broader psychopathology have been proposed to address issues of heterogeneity, comorbidity, clinical utility, and equitable representation. However, systematic and practical methods and guidelines to organize and apply these models remain scarce. The Middle‐Out Approach is a novel, integrative, contextually informed framework for organizing and applying existing empirical methods to evaluate current and alternative traumatic stress reactions. Rather than beginning to identify traumatic stress reactions from the top‐down (i.e., disorder‐first approach) or bottom‐up (i.e., symptom‐first approach), constructs are evaluated from the middle out (i.e., presentation‐first approach), unconstrained by higher‐order disorders or lower‐order diagnostic symptoms. This approach provides innovation over previous methods at multiple levels, including the conceptualization of traumatic stress reactions as well as the type of assessments and data sources used and how they are used in statistical analyses. Conceptualizations prioritize the identification of middle‐order phenotypes, representing person‐centered clinical presentations, which are informed by the integration of multidimensional, transdiagnostic, and multimodal (e.g., psychosocial, physiological) assessments and/or data sources. Integrated data are then analyzed concurrently using person‐centered statistical models to identify precise, discrete, and representative health outcomes within broader heterogeneous samples. Subsequent variable‐centered analyses are then used to identify culturally sensitive and contextually informed correlates of phenotypes, their clinical utility, and the differential composition within and between broader traumatic stress reactions. Examples from the moral injury literature are used to illustrate practical applications that may increase clinical utility and the accurate representation of health outcomes for diverse individuals and communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Journal of Traumatic Stress is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Alternative models of traumatic stress and broader psychopathology have been proposed to address issues of heterogeneity, comorbidity, clinical utility, and equitable representation. However, systematic and practical methods and guidelines to organize and apply these models remain scarce. The Middle‐Out Approach is a novel, integrative, contextually informed framework for organizing and applying existing empirical methods to evaluate current and alternative traumatic stress reactions. Rather than beginning to identify traumatic stress reactions from the top‐down (i.e., disorder‐first approach) or bottom‐up (i.e., symptom‐first approach), constructs are evaluated from the middle out (i.e., presentation‐first approach), unconstrained by higher‐order disorders or lower‐order diagnostic symptoms. This approach provides innovation over previous methods at multiple levels, including the conceptualization of traumatic stress reactions as well as the type of assessments and data sources used and how they are used in statistical analyses. Conceptualizations prioritize the identification of middle‐order phenotypes, representing person‐centered clinical presentations, which are informed by the integration of multidimensional, transdiagnostic, and multimodal (e.g., psychosocial, physiological) assessments and/or data sources. Integrated data are then analyzed concurrently using person‐centered statistical models to identify precise, discrete, and representative health outcomes within broader heterogeneous samples. Subsequent variable‐centered analyses are then used to identify culturally sensitive and contextually informed correlates of phenotypes, their clinical utility, and the differential composition within and between broader traumatic stress reactions. Examples from the moral injury literature are used to illustrate practical applications that may increase clinical utility and the accurate representation of health outcomes for diverse individuals and communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 08949867 |
| DOI: | 10.1002/jts.23005 |
