Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
J Affect Disord. 2023 Nov 1;340:174-180. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2023.08.014. Epub 2023 Aug 7.
A recent meta-analysis concluded to have found proof for both a social causation model, according to which social support protects against posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and a social selection model, which claims that PTSD erodes social support. However, the prospective cross-lagged effects were estimated while adjusting for a prior measurement of the outcome and this method is vulnerable for spurious findings due to correlations with residuals and regression toward the mean. The present re-analyses of the meta-analytic effects indicated that depending on used model one can choose to claim that social support has either a decreasing, an increasing, or no prospective effect on subsequent change in PTSD symptom severity, and vice versa. Therefore, claims over and above a negative cross-sectional correlation between social support and PTSD, including the social causation and social selection models, can be questioned. The findings were validated by analyses of simulated data, which indicated that prospective effects were not necessary for the observed meta-analytic associations.
最近的一项荟萃分析得出结论，同时支持了社会因果模型和社会选择模型。前者认为社会支持可以预防创伤后应激障碍（PTSD），后者则声称 PTSD 会削弱社会支持。然而，在调整了先前的结果测量后，对前瞻性交叉滞后效应进行了估计，这种方法由于与残差相关以及向平均值回归，容易产生虚假发现。本荟萃分析的重新分析表明，根据所使用的模型，人们可以选择声称社会支持对 PTSD 症状严重程度的后续变化要么有降低的、增加的或没有前瞻性影响，反之亦然。因此，除了社会支持与 PTSD 之间的负横断面相关性之外，包括社会因果和社会选择模型在内的各种说法都值得质疑。通过对模拟数据的分析验证了这些发现，这些分析表明，观察到的荟萃分析关联不一定需要前瞻性效应。
