Penn State Children's Hospital, Hershey, PA, USA; Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, USA.
Res Dev Disabil. 2018 Jun;77:24-29. doi: 10.1016/j.ridd.2018.03.012. Epub 2018 Apr 5.
Reactive Attachment Disorder (RAD) is an often discussed, but misunderstood, diagnostic presentation. A growing body of well-designed prospective studies is providing a wealth of information about the condition; however, misconceptions of RAD abound in both clinical and research arenas. As such, it can be difficult for reviewers to critically evaluate papers pertaining to RAD that are submitted to academic journals and even more difficult for practicing clinicians operating under the time constraints of community-based practice. Papers continue to appear that promote RAD as a form of conduct disorder (CD) or callous/unemotional (CU) presentation among maltreated children, although this conceptualization is directly at odds with the diagnostic criteria found in the DSM-5 and ICD-10 as well as a significant body of well-conducted research. Studies attempting to promote this understanding of RAD typically suffer from significant and multiple methodological flaws. This paper reviews these concerns and provides 5 questions that must be sufficiently answered when evaluating a paper purportedly examining RAD. A recently published paper promoting the CD/CU-conceptualization of RAD is critiqued as an exemplar of applying these 5 questions.
反应性依恋障碍(RAD)是一个经常被讨论但却被误解的诊断表现。越来越多精心设计的前瞻性研究为该病症提供了丰富的信息;然而,RAD 在临床和研究领域都存在很多误解。因此,对于学术期刊上提交的与 RAD 相关的论文,评论者很难进行批判性评估,对于在社区实践中受到时间限制的执业临床医生来说就更难了。尽管这种概念与 DSM-5 和 ICD-10 中的诊断标准以及大量精心设计的研究直接相悖,但仍有论文继续将 RAD 视为受虐待儿童的行为障碍(CD)或冷酷/无感情(CU)表现形式。试图促进对 RAD 的这种理解的研究通常存在严重且多重的方法学缺陷。本文回顾了这些关注点,并提供了 5 个在评估据称检查 RAD 的论文时必须充分回答的问题。本文还批评了一篇最近发表的论文,该论文将 CD/CU 概念化作为应用这 5 个问题的范例。