Reinhold Anna Katharina, Trudzik Patrick, Brütt Anna Levke
Department of Health Services Research, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany.
Department of Medical Psychology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
BMC Psychiatry. 2024 Jul 16;24(1):503. doi: 10.1186/s12888-024-05949-z.
According to the Common-Sense Model of Illness Representations, illness beliefs, such as causal attributions, can influence the way people assess and cope with their illness and vice versa. To date, causal attributions in people with depressive symptoms have been studied mainly cross-sectionally, quantitatively and independently. The purpose of this study is to examine the causal attributions of people with depressive symptoms in terms of their stability over time, dependence on treatment experience, and differentiation of causal concepts.
In a population-based prospective sample, people with at least mild depressive symptoms (PHQ-9 Score ≥ 5) were interviewed via telephone at T0 and twelve months later (T1). Causal attributions were assessed using the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire. After the open responses were qualitatively analysed using a deductive-inductive approach, stability over time was assessed for causal attributions and concepts by comparing answers between the two time points. Subsequent exploratory quantitative analyses were conducted using chi-square tests, t-tests, and logistic regression analyses.
A total of 471 individuals (age M = 53.9, 53.6% female) with a mean PHQ-9 Score of 8.4 were included in the analyses. Causal attributions related to participants' social environment, workplace, and past are the most stable over time. However, individuals with and without a time-stable causal concept showed no differences in terms of sociodemographic characteristics, severity of depressive symptoms, risk of comorbidity, and treatment experiences. Overall, the causal concepts of people with depressive symptoms appear to be very diverse. Those with treatment experience (M = 2.21, SD = 0.80) named significantly more causal attributions compared to people without treatment experience (M = 1.98, SD = 0.81, t(471) = -3.060, p < 0.01). In addition, logistic regression analyses revealed that treatment-experienced respondents were more likely to attribute "childhood/youth/parental home" and "predisposition".
Our study reveals that people with treatment experience tend to report treatment-congruent causal attributions, such as childhood and family environment, as well as predisposition, more frequently. Understanding how causal attributions and concepts are formed and change can be helpful for addressing causal attributions in treatment. Future studies should take into account the benefits of employing qualitative survey methods for exploring causal attributions.
根据疾病表征的常识模型,疾病信念,如因果归因,会影响人们评估和应对疾病的方式,反之亦然。迄今为止,对有抑郁症状者的因果归因研究主要是横断面研究、定量研究且相互独立。本研究的目的是从抑郁症状者因果归因随时间的稳定性、对治疗经验的依赖性以及因果概念的区分等方面进行考察。
在一个基于人群的前瞻性样本中,对至少有轻度抑郁症状(患者健康问卷-9得分≥5)的人在T0时通过电话进行访谈,并在十二个月后(T1)再次访谈。使用简短疾病认知问卷评估因果归因。在对开放式回答采用演绎-归纳法进行定性分析后,通过比较两个时间点的答案来评估因果归因和概念随时间的稳定性。随后使用卡方检验、t检验和逻辑回归分析进行探索性定量分析。
共有471名个体(年龄M = 53.9,53.6%为女性)纳入分析,患者健康问卷-9平均得分为8.4。与参与者的社会环境、工作场所和过去相关的因果归因随时间最为稳定。然而,有和没有随时间稳定的因果概念的个体在社会人口学特征、抑郁症状严重程度、共病风险和治疗经历方面没有差异。总体而言,有抑郁症状者的因果概念似乎非常多样。有治疗经验者(M = 2.21,标准差 = 0.80)提及的因果归因显著多于没有治疗经验者(M = 1.98,标准差 = 0.81,t(471) = -3.060,p < 0.01)。此外,逻辑回归分析显示,有治疗经验的受访者更倾向于将“童年/青年/父母家”和“易感性”作为因果归因。
我们的研究表明,有治疗经验的人往往更频繁地报告与治疗相符的因果归因,如童年和家庭环境以及易感性。了解因果归因和概念是如何形成和变化的,有助于在治疗中处理因果归因。未来的研究应考虑采用定性调查方法探索因果归因的益处。