Centre for Healthy Communities, School of Public Health, University of Alberta, 3-300 Edmonton Clinic Health Academy, 11405 - 87 Ave, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, Sleep and Allergy, University of Illinois at Chicago, 840 S Wood St. MC719, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA.
Soc Sci Med. 2021 Mar;272:112846. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.112846. Epub 2020 Feb 10.
The biopsychosocial (BPS) model that challenged the historically dominant biomedical model remains influential today. This model considers biological, psychological, and social factors that can contribute to health and illness. Yet, a growing body of literature has been highly critical of the model for being too vague and for not providing details as to how the three factors of the model interact and contribute to health and illness.
Because biological, psychological, and social factors can be considered as distinct 'systems' that can be conceptually separated, defined, and measured, we sought to examine interrelationships among these factors.
By employing analytical reasoning and carefully considering relevant research evidence of direct pathways among biological, psychological, and social factors as applicable to an individual's health and well-being, this article introduces an updated theoretical model: the BPS-Pathways model.
We present all six potential pathways among biological (B), psychological (P), and social (S) factors of the model, and explain how these pathways can potentially contribute to subjective well-being and to objective physical health outcomes. The influential pathways that lead to subjective well-being are S→P and B→P pathways, although these pathways can be impacted by psychological factors that differ among individuals. For objective health outcomes, the P→B and S→B pathways appear to be important, where the latter pathway is mediated by psychological factors. We additionally highlight the importance of systematically understanding subjective experience, which represents an epistemologically distinct domain, and describe how subjective experience can explain individual differences in causal pathways.
The BPS-Pathways model presents a framework that can have important implications for clinical practice, as well as research, and can be useful for tailoring personalized medicine.
挑战历史上占主导地位的生物医学模式的心理-社会-生物(BPS)模式至今仍具有影响力。该模型考虑了可能导致健康和疾病的生物、心理和社会因素。然而,越来越多的文献对该模型提出了批评,认为它过于模糊,没有详细说明模型的三个因素如何相互作用并导致健康和疾病。
由于生物、心理和社会因素可以被视为可以概念上分离、定义和测量的不同“系统”,我们试图研究这些因素之间的相互关系。
通过运用分析推理,并仔细考虑与个体健康和福祉相关的生物、心理和社会因素之间直接关系的相关研究证据,本文引入了一个更新的理论模型:BPS-途径模型。
我们提出了该模型中生物(B)、心理(P)和社会(S)因素之间的所有六种潜在途径,并解释了这些途径如何潜在地有助于主观幸福感和客观身体健康结果。导致主观幸福感的有影响力的途径是 S→P 和 B→P 途径,尽管这些途径可能会受到个体之间不同的心理因素的影响。对于客观健康结果,P→B 和 S→B 途径似乎很重要,其中后者途径是由心理因素介导的。我们还强调了系统地理解主观体验的重要性,主观体验代表了一个认识论上不同的领域,并描述了主观体验如何解释因果途径中的个体差异。
BPS-途径模型提供了一个框架,对临床实践以及研究都具有重要意义,并且可以用于定制个性化医疗。