• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

目标导向性计划与自我报告的强迫性与强迫症诊断之间的关联比较。

Comparison of the Association Between Goal-Directed Planning and Self-reported Compulsivity vs Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder Diagnosis.

机构信息

School of Psychology, Trinity College Institute of Neuroscience and Global Brain Health Institute, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.

Department of Psychology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Mount Scopus, Israel.

出版信息

JAMA Psychiatry. 2020 Jan 1;77(1):77-85. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2019.2998.

DOI:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2019.2998
PMID:31596434
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6802255/
Abstract

IMPORTANCE

Dimensional definitions of transdiagnostic mental health problems have been suggested as an alternative to categorical diagnoses, having the advantage of capturing heterogeneity within diagnostic categories and similarity across them and bridging more naturally psychological and neural substrates.

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether a self-reported compulsivity dimension has a stronger association with goal-directed and related higher-order cognitive deficits compared with a diagnosis of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this cross-sectional study, patients with OCD and/or generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) from across the United States completed a telephone-based diagnostic interview by a trained rater, internet-based cognitive testing, and self-reported clinical assessments from October 8, 2015, to October 1, 2017. Follow-up data were collected to test for replicability.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Performance was measured on a test of goal-directed planning and cognitive flexibility (Wisconsin Card Sorting Test [WCST]) and a test of abstract reasoning. Clinical variables included DSM-5 diagnosis of OCD and GAD and 3 psychiatric symptom dimensions (general distress, compulsivity, and obsessionality) derived from a factor analysis.

RESULTS

Of 285 individuals in the analysis (mean [SD] age, 32 [12] years; age range, 18-77 years; 219 [76.8%] female), 111 had OCD; 82, GAD; and 92, OCD and GAD. A diagnosis of OCD was not associated with goal-directed performance compared with GAD at baseline (β [SE], -0.02 [0.02]; P = .18). In contrast, a compulsivity dimension was negatively associated with goal-directed performance (β [SE], -0.05 [0.02]; P = .003). Results for abstract reasoning task and WCST mirrored this pattern; the compulsivity dimension was associated with abstract reasoning (β [SE], 2.99 [0.63]; P < .001) and several indicators of WCST performance (eg, categories completed: β [SE], -0.57 [0.09]; P < .001), whereas OCD diagnosis was not (abstract reasoning: β [SE], 0.39 [0.66]; P = .56; categories completed: β [SE], -0.09 [0.10]; P = .38). Other symptom dimensions relevant to OCD, obsessionality, and general distress had no reliable association with goal-directed performance, WCST, or abstract reasoning. Obsessionality had a positive association with requiring more trials to reach the first category on the WCST at baseline (β [SE], 2.92 [1.39]; P = .04), and general distress was associated with impaired goal-directed performance at baseline (β [SE],-0.04 [0.02]; P = .01). However, unlike the key results of this study, neither survived correction for multiple comparisons or was replicated at follow-up testing.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Deficits in goal-directed planning in OCD may be more strongly associated with a compulsivity dimension than with OCD diagnosis. This result may have implications for research assessing the association between brain mechanisms and clinical manifestations and for understanding the structure of mental illness.

摘要

重要性

与分类诊断相比,跨诊断心理健康问题的维度定义被认为是一种替代方法,它具有捕捉诊断类别内部异质性和类别之间相似性的优势,并更自然地连接心理和神经基础。

目的

检验与强迫症(OCD)诊断相比,自我报告的强迫维度是否与目标导向和相关的高阶认知缺陷有更强的关联。

设计、地点和参与者:在这项横断面研究中,来自美国各地的 OCD 和/或广泛性焦虑症(GAD)患者通过经过培训的评估员进行电话诊断访谈、基于互联网的认知测试和自我报告的临床评估,完成了从 2015 年 10 月 8 日到 2017 年 10 月 1 日的数据收集。进行了随访数据收集以测试可重复性。

主要结果和测量

使用目标导向计划和认知灵活性测试(威斯康星卡片分类测试[WCST])和抽象推理测试来衡量表现。临床变量包括 DSM-5 强迫症和 GAD 诊断以及从因子分析中得出的 3 个精神病症状维度(一般困扰、强迫性和强迫观念)。

结果

在分析中的 285 名个体中(平均[SD]年龄为 32[12]岁;年龄范围为 18-77 岁;219[76.8%]为女性),111 名患有 OCD;82 名患有 GAD;92 名患有 OCD 和 GAD。与 GAD 相比,OCD 诊断基线时与目标导向表现无关(β[SE],-0.02[0.02];P = .18)。相比之下,强迫维度与目标导向表现呈负相关(β[SE],-0.05[0.02];P = .003)。抽象推理任务和 WCST 的结果反映了这种模式;强迫维度与抽象推理(β[SE],2.99[0.63];P < .001)和 WCST 表现的几个指标相关(例如,完成的类别:β[SE],-0.57[0.09];P < .001),而 OCD 诊断则没有(抽象推理:β[SE],0.39[0.66];P = .56;完成的类别:β[SE],-0.09[0.10];P = .38)。与 OCD 相关的其他症状维度,强迫观念和一般困扰,与目标导向表现、WCST 或抽象推理没有可靠的关联。强迫观念与 WCST 基线时首次达到第一个类别所需的试验次数呈正相关(β[SE],2.92[1.39];P = .04),一般困扰与基线时的目标导向表现受损有关(β[SE],-0.04[0.02];P = .01)。然而,与本研究的主要结果不同,这些结果都没有通过多次比较校正或在随访测试中得到复制。

结论和相关性

OCD 中目标导向计划的缺陷可能与强迫维度的关联比与 OCD 诊断的关联更强。该结果可能对评估大脑机制与临床表现之间的关联以及理解精神疾病结构的研究具有重要意义。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a518/6802255/78866a16d727/jamapsychiatry-77-77-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a518/6802255/af5884fb7b2c/jamapsychiatry-77-77-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a518/6802255/deef61ebc6c3/jamapsychiatry-77-77-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a518/6802255/78866a16d727/jamapsychiatry-77-77-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a518/6802255/af5884fb7b2c/jamapsychiatry-77-77-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a518/6802255/deef61ebc6c3/jamapsychiatry-77-77-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a518/6802255/78866a16d727/jamapsychiatry-77-77-g003.jpg

相似文献

1
Comparison of the Association Between Goal-Directed Planning and Self-reported Compulsivity vs Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder Diagnosis.目标导向性计划与自我报告的强迫性与强迫症诊断之间的关联比较。
JAMA Psychiatry. 2020 Jan 1;77(1):77-85. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2019.2998.
2
Obsessive-compulsive spectrum disorders in obsessive-compulsive disorder and other anxiety disorders.强迫症及其他焦虑障碍中的强迫谱系障碍。
Psychopathology. 2010;43(6):389-96. doi: 10.1159/000321070. Epub 2010 Sep 16.
3
Dual diagnosis of obsessive compulsive and compulsive buying disorders: Demographic, clinical, and psychiatric correlates.强迫症和强迫性购物障碍的双重诊断:人口统计学、临床和精神科相关因素。
Compr Psychiatry. 2018 Oct;86:67-73. doi: 10.1016/j.comppsych.2018.07.013. Epub 2018 Jul 29.
4
Blood levels of interleukin-1 beta, interleukin-6 and tumor necrosis factor-alpha and cognitive functions in patients with obsessive compulsive disorder.强迫症患者的白细胞介素-1β、白细胞介素-6 和肿瘤坏死因子-α的血液水平与认知功能。
Compr Psychiatry. 2019 Feb;89:61-66. doi: 10.1016/j.comppsych.2018.11.013. Epub 2018 Dec 21.
5
Ethical sensitivity in obsessive-compulsive disorder and generalized anxiety disorder: the role of reversal learning.强迫症和广泛性焦虑障碍中的道德敏感性:反转学习的作用。
J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2013 Dec;44(4):404-10. doi: 10.1016/j.jbtep.2013.04.001. Epub 2013 Apr 30.
6
Disruption in the balance between goal-directed behavior and habit learning in obsessive-compulsive disorder.强迫症中目标导向行为和习惯学习之间平衡的破坏。
Am J Psychiatry. 2011 Jul;168(7):718-26. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2011.10071062. Epub 2011 May 15.
7
Compulsive hoarding: OCD symptom, distinct clinical syndrome, or both?强迫性囤积:强迫症症状、独特的临床综合征,还是两者皆是?
Am J Psychiatry. 2008 Oct;165(10):1289-98. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2008.07111730. Epub 2008 May 15.
8
Compulsive hoarders: how do they differ from individuals with obsessive compulsive disorder?强迫囤积症患者:他们与强迫症患者有何不同?
Psychiatry Res. 2012 Nov 30;200(1):35-40. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2012.04.002. Epub 2012 Jun 27.
9
A study of cognitive function in treatment-refractory obsessive-compulsive disorder treated with capsulotomy.经立体定向手术治疗的难治性强迫症认知功能研究。
J Neurosurg. 2018 Feb;128(2):583-595. doi: 10.3171/2016.9.JNS152494. Epub 2017 Mar 24.
10
Worries and obsessions in individuals with obsessive-compulsive disorder with and without comorbid generalized anxiety disorder.患有和未患有共病广泛性焦虑症的强迫症患者的担忧与强迫观念。
Behav Res Ther. 1998 Jul-Aug;36(7-8):695-700. doi: 10.1016/s0005-7967(98)00058-8.

引用本文的文献

1
The rollercoaster of obsessive-compulsive disorder: How chronotype and time of day affect behavioral inhibition in adults with OCD.强迫症的起伏:昼夜节律类型和一天中的时间如何影响成年强迫症患者的行为抑制
J Mood Anxiety Disord. 2025 Mar 1;10:100113. doi: 10.1016/j.xjmad.2025.100113. eCollection 2025 Jun.
2
No Impaired Inhibition of Stimulus-Driven Behavior in Pediatric Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: a Partial Test of the Habit Formation Model.儿童强迫症中刺激驱动行为的抑制未受损:习惯形成模型的部分检验
Res Child Adolesc Psychopathol. 2025 Mar;53(3):405-416. doi: 10.1007/s10802-025-01304-2. Epub 2025 Mar 6.
3

本文引用的文献

1
Evaluating the evidence for biotypes of depression: Methodological replication and extension of.评估抑郁症生物型的证据:方法学的复制和扩展。
Neuroimage Clin. 2019;22:101796. doi: 10.1016/j.nicl.2019.101796. Epub 2019 Mar 27.
2
Model-based learning and individual differences in depression: The moderating role of stress.基于模型的学习与抑郁的个体差异:应激的调节作用。
Behav Res Ther. 2018 Dec;111:19-26. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2018.09.007. Epub 2018 Sep 26.
3
Incentives Boost Model-Based Control Across a Range of Severity on Several Psychiatric Constructs.
The amygdala and the pursuit of future rewards.
杏仁核与对未来奖赏的追求。
Front Neurosci. 2025 Jan 22;18:1517231. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2024.1517231. eCollection 2024.
4
A hierarchical reinforcement learning model explains individual differences in attentional set shifting.分层强化学习模型解释了注意定势转移的个体差异。
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2024 Dec;24(6):1008-1022. doi: 10.3758/s13415-024-01223-7. Epub 2024 Sep 23.
5
Lower confidence and increased error sensitivity in OCD patients while learning under volatility.强迫症患者在波动性条件下学习时信心降低,错误敏感度增加。
Transl Psychiatry. 2024 Sep 12;14(1):370. doi: 10.1038/s41398-024-03042-3.
6
On the effects of impulsivity and compulsivity on neural correlates of model-based performance.论冲动性和强迫性对基于模型表现的神经相关性的影响。
Sci Rep. 2024 Sep 10;14(1):21057. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-71692-w.
7
Using smartphones to optimise and scale-up the assessment of model-based planning.利用智能手机优化并扩大基于模型规划的评估。
Commun Psychol. 2023 Nov 1;1(1):31. doi: 10.1038/s44271-023-00031-y.
8
Disorders of compulsivity: Deficits in arbitrating learning strategies.强迫障碍:学习策略仲裁的缺陷。
Addict Biol. 2024 Aug;29(8):e13433. doi: 10.1111/adb.13433.
9
Beliefs, compulsive behavior and reduced confidence in control.信念、强迫行为和对控制的信心降低。
PLoS Comput Biol. 2024 Jun 20;20(6):e1012207. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1012207. eCollection 2024 Jun.
10
Gambling Environment Exposure Increases Temporal Discounting but Improves Model-Based Control in Regular Slot-Machine Gamblers.接触赌博环境会增加时间折扣,但会改善经常玩老虎机的赌徒基于模型的控制能力。
Comput Psychiatr. 2022 Jul 5;6(1):142-165. doi: 10.5334/cpsy.84. eCollection 2022.
激励措施提高了多种精神疾病概念模型为基础的控制在一系列严重程度上的效果。
Biol Psychiatry. 2019 Mar 1;85(5):425-433. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2018.06.018. Epub 2018 Jul 2.
4
Psychiatric Symptom Dimensions Are Associated With Dissociable Shifts in Metacognition but Not Task Performance.精神症状维度与元认知的可分离转变有关,但与任务表现无关。
Biol Psychiatry. 2018 Sep 15;84(6):443-451. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2017.12.017. Epub 2018 Jan 11.
5
Transdiagnostic Symptom Clusters and Associations With Brain, Behavior, and Daily Function in Mood, Anxiety, and Trauma Disorders.跨诊断症状群与心境、焦虑和创伤障碍中的大脑、行为和日常功能的关联。
JAMA Psychiatry. 2018 Feb 1;75(2):201-209. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2017.3951.
6
Meta-Analysis of Intelligence Quotient (IQ) in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder.强迫症患者智力商数(IQ)的荟萃分析。
Neuropsychol Rev. 2018 Mar;28(1):111-120. doi: 10.1007/s11065-017-9358-0. Epub 2017 Sep 1.
7
Stress enhances model-free reinforcement learning only after negative outcome.压力仅在负面结果后增强无模型强化学习。
PLoS One. 2017 Jul 19;12(7):e0180588. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0180588. eCollection 2017.
8
A trans-diagnostic perspective on obsessive-compulsive disorder.关于强迫症的跨诊断视角。
Psychol Med. 2017 Jul;47(9):1528-1548. doi: 10.1017/S0033291716002786. Epub 2017 Mar 27.
9
Resting-state connectivity biomarkers define neurophysiological subtypes of depression.静息态连接生物标志物定义了抑郁症的神经生理亚型。
Nat Med. 2017 Jan;23(1):28-38. doi: 10.1038/nm.4246. Epub 2016 Dec 5.
10
Taking Psychiatry Research Online.在线精神病学研究。
Neuron. 2016 Jul 6;91(1):19-23. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2016.06.002.