Kohls Gregor, Fairchild Graeme, Bernhard Anka, Martinelli Anne, Smaragdi Areti, Gonzalez-Madruga Karen, Wells Amy, Rogers Jack C, Pauli Ruth, Oldenhof Helena, Jansen Lucres, van Rhijn Arthur, Kersten Linda, Alfano Janine, Baumann Sarah, Herpertz-Dahlmann Beate, Vetro Agnes, Lazaratou Helen, Hervas Amaia, Fernández-Rivas Aranzazu, Popma Arne, Stadler Christina, De Brito Stephane A, Freitag Christine M, Konrad Kerstin
Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy, Child Neuropsychology Section, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Department of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, United Kingdom.
Front Psychiatry. 2020 Dec 22;11:585052. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.585052. eCollection 2020.
At the group level, youths with conduct disorder (CD) show deficient emotion processing across various tasks compared to typically developing controls (TDC). But little is known about neuropsychological subgroups within the CD population, the clinical correlates of emotion processing deficits [for instance, with regard to the presence or absence of the DSM-5 Limited Prosocial Emotions (LPE) specifier], and associated risk factors. 542 children and adolescents with CD (317 girls) and 710 TDCs (479 girls), aged 9-18 years, were included from the FemNAT-CD multisite study. All participants completed three neuropsychological tasks assessing emotion recognition, emotion learning, and emotion regulation. We used a self-report measure of callous-unemotional traits to create a proxy for the LPE specifier. Relative to TDCs, youths with CD as a group performed worse in all three emotion domains. But using clinically based cut-off scores, we found poor emotion recognition skills in only 23% of the participants with CD, followed by emotion regulation deficits in 18%, and emotion learning deficits in 13% of the CD group. Critically, the majority of youths with CD (56%) did not demonstrate any meaningful neuropsychological deficit, and only a very small proportion showed pervasive deficits across all three domains (1%). Further analyses indicate that established DSM-5 subtypes of CD are not tightly linked to neurocognitive deficits in one particular emotion domain over another (i.e., emotion recognition deficits in CD+LPE vs. emotion regulation deficits in CD-LPE). Findings from this large-scale data set suggest substantial neuropsychological diversity in emotion processing in the CD population and, consequently, only a subgroup of youths with CD are likely to benefit from additional behavioral interventions specifically targeting emotion processing mechanisms.
在群体层面,与正常发育的对照组(TDC)相比,患有品行障碍(CD)的青少年在各种任务中表现出情绪加工缺陷。但对于CD人群中的神经心理学亚组、情绪加工缺陷的临床相关性(例如,关于DSM-5有限亲社会情感(LPE)说明符的存在与否)以及相关风险因素,我们知之甚少。来自FemNAT-CD多中心研究的542名患有CD的儿童和青少年(317名女孩)以及710名TDC(479名女孩),年龄在9至18岁之间。所有参与者完成了三项评估情绪识别、情绪学习和情绪调节的神经心理学任务。我们使用了一种关于冷漠无情特质的自我报告测量方法来创建LPE说明符的替代指标。相对于TDC,患有CD的青少年作为一个群体在所有三个情绪领域的表现都更差。但使用基于临床的临界分数,我们发现只有23%的患有CD的参与者情绪识别技能较差,其次,CD组中18%的人存在情绪调节缺陷,13%的人存在情绪学习缺陷。关键的是,大多数患有CD的青少年(约56%)没有表现出任何有意义的神经心理学缺陷,只有极小比例的人在所有三个领域都存在普遍缺陷(约1%)。进一步分析表明,已确立的DSM-5中CD的亚型与一个特定情绪领域而非另一个领域的神经认知缺陷没有紧密联系(即,CD+LPE中的情绪识别缺陷与CD-LPE中的情绪调节缺陷)。来自这个大规模数据集的结果表明,CD人群在情绪加工方面存在大量的神经心理学差异,因此,只有一小部分患有CD的青少年可能会从专门针对情绪加工机制的额外行为干预中受益。