Research Master Student in Cognitive and Clinical Neuroscience Psychopathology Program, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Department of Psychiatry, Gazi University Medical School, Ankara, Turkey.
Schizophr Bull. 2021 Jul 8;47(4):889-895. doi: 10.1093/schbul/sbab048.
This article aims to evaluate "racial", ethnic, and population diversity-or lack thereof-in psychosis research, with a particular focus on socio-environmental studies. Samples of psychosis research remain heavily biased toward Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) societies. Furthermore, we often fail to acknowledge the lack of diversity, thereby implying that our findings can be generalized to all populations regardless of their social, ethnic, and cultural background. This has major consequences. Clinical trials generate findings that are not generalizable across ethnicity. The genomic-based prediction models are far from being applicable to the "Majority World." Socio-environmental theories of psychosis are solely based on findings of the empirical studies conducted in WEIRD populations. If and how these socio-environmental factors affect individuals in entirely different geographic locations, gene pools, social structures and norms, cultures, and potentially protective counter-factors remain unclear. How socio-environmental factors are assessed and studied is another major shortcoming. By embracing the complexity of environment, the exposome paradigm may facilitate the evaluation of interdependent exposures, which could explain how variations in socio-environmental factors across different social and geographical settings could contribute to divergent paths to psychosis. Testing these divergent paths to psychosis will however require increasing the diversity of study populations that could be achieved by establishing true partnerships between WEIRD societies and the Majority World with the support of funding agencies aspired to foster replicable research across diverse populations. The time has come to make diversity in psychosis research more than a buzzword.
本文旨在评估精神病学研究中的“种族”、民族和人口多样性——或缺乏多样性,特别是在社会环境研究方面。精神病学研究的样本仍然严重偏向于西方、受过教育、工业化、富裕和民主(WEIRD)社会。此外,我们经常忽略缺乏多样性,从而暗示我们的研究结果可以推广到所有人群,而不论其社会、民族和文化背景如何。这会产生重大影响。临床试验得出的发现不能推广到不同种族。基于基因组的预测模型远不能适用于“多数世界”。精神病学的社会环境理论仅基于在 WEIRD 人群中进行的实证研究的发现。这些社会环境因素如何以及是否会影响地理位置、基因库、社会结构和规范、文化完全不同的个体,以及潜在的保护因素仍然不清楚。社会环境因素的评估和研究方法是另一个主要缺陷。通过接受环境的复杂性,外显子组范式可以促进对相互依存的暴露因素的评估,这可以解释为什么不同社会和地理环境中的社会环境因素会导致不同的精神病途径。然而,要检验这些不同的精神病途径,需要增加研究人群的多样性,这可以通过在资金机构的支持下,在 WEIRD 社会与多数世界之间建立真正的伙伴关系来实现,这些资金机构旨在促进在不同人群中进行可复制的研究。现在是时候让精神病学研究中的多样性不仅仅是一个流行语了。