Cui Jingmeng, Olthof Merlijn, Hasselman Fred, Lichtwarck-Aschoff Anna
Faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences, University of Groningen, Grote Kruisstraat 2/1, Groningen, 9712 TS, The Netherlands.
Behavioural Science Institute, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
BMC Psychiatry. 2025 Mar 19;25(1):261. doi: 10.1186/s12888-025-06688-5.
The past few years have seen a rapid growth in research on early warning signals (EWSs) in the psychopathology domain. Whereas early studies found EWSs to be associated with sudden changes in clinical change trajectories, later findings showed that EWSs may not be general across variables and cases and have low predictive power. These mixed results may be explained by the diverse methods employed in clinical EWS studies, with some of these approaches and practices potentially misaligned with the underlying theory of EWSs.
This article employs a variety of methods, such as a narrative review, mathematical derivations, simulations, and visual illustrations, to support our claims, explain specific assumptions, and guide future empirical research. This multitude of methods serves our aim to provide theoretical as well as methodological contributions to the field.
We identify the following key assumptions for EWS validation studies: the system departs from a point attractor, EWSs appear before the critical transition, and EWS variables align with system destabilization. The literature review shows that the common research practices in the field are often not in line with those assumptions, and we provide specific suggestions corresponding to each of the assumptions.
More rigorous empirical evidence is needed to better validate the existence of EWSs in clinical sudden changes and fully realize their clinical potential. As theory-based prediction tools, EWSs require stronger alignment between theory and practice to enhance both theoretical understanding and predictive accuracy.
Not applicable.
在过去几年中,精神病理学领域关于早期预警信号(EWS)的研究迅速增加。早期研究发现EWS与临床变化轨迹的突然变化相关,而后来的研究结果表明,EWS可能并非在所有变量和病例中都普遍存在,且预测能力较低。这些相互矛盾的结果可能是由于临床EWS研究中采用的方法多种多样,其中一些方法和实践可能与EWS的潜在理论不一致。
本文采用了多种方法,如叙述性综述、数学推导、模拟和可视化说明,以支持我们的观点、解释具体假设并指导未来的实证研究。这些多种方法有助于我们为该领域提供理论和方法上的贡献。
我们确定了EWS验证研究的以下关键假设:系统偏离点吸引子、EWS在临界转变之前出现,以及EWS变量与系统不稳定一致。文献综述表明,该领域的常见研究实践往往不符合这些假设,我们针对每个假设提供了具体建议。
需要更严格的实证证据来更好地验证EWS在临床突然变化中的存在,并充分实现其临床潜力。作为基于理论的预测工具,EWS需要理论与实践之间更强的一致性,以提高理论理解和预测准确性。
不适用。