Moriarity Daniel P, Perkins Emily R, Joyner Keanan J
Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Biol Psychiatry. 2025 Apr 30. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2025.04.015.
As psychiatry increasingly embraces precision medicine principles, there have been efforts to characterize the specificity of biology-psychopathology associations (e.g., is biology associated with syndromes or symptoms?). Unfortunately, the vast majority of research is designed to test syndromes (e.g., case-control, symptom total/average scores) or individual symptoms a priori based on untested assumptions. Alternatively, most studies that attempt to empirically compare these options test biology as a predictor of 1) syndromes and 2) symptoms in separate models that are unable to directly falsify the specificity of observed associations because these options are not directly competing for the same variance. In this review, we will 1) discuss the historical tension between symptom- and syndrome-focused psychiatry; 2) introduce hierarchical phenotyping as an approach to determining the specificity of biology-psychopathology associations; 3) highlight how hierarchical phenotyping approaches are complementary to leading nosological movements in psychopathology research; 4) illustrate how a hierarchical phenotyping lens can generate promising future directions for precision psychiatry using immunopsychiatric, genetic, and neurophysiological examples; 5) highlight clinical implications of hierarchical phenotyping approaches to psychiatry; 6) discuss methodological implications of hierarchical phenotyping for best practices in measuring and modeling psychopathology; and 7) introduce methodological resources for readers interested in investigating hierarchical phenotyping in their own work. In doing so, we seek to build the case for hierarchical phenotyping approaches while simultaneously preparing motivated readers to use these methods in their own work to advance precision psychopathology research.
随着精神病学越来越多地采用精准医学原则,人们一直在努力描述生物学与精神病理学关联的特异性(例如,生物学与综合征还是症状相关?)。不幸的是,绝大多数研究都是基于未经检验的假设,预先设计来测试综合征(例如,病例对照、症状总分/平均分)或个体症状。另外,大多数试图实证比较这些选项的研究,是在单独的模型中测试生物学作为1)综合征和2)症状的预测因子,因为这些选项并非直接竞争相同的方差,所以无法直接证伪所观察到的关联的特异性。在本综述中,我们将1)讨论以症状为重点和以综合征为重点的精神病学之间的历史矛盾;2)引入分层表型分析作为确定生物学与精神病理学关联特异性的一种方法;3)强调分层表型分析方法如何与精神病理学研究中主要的疾病分类学进展相辅相成;4)通过免疫精神病学、遗传学和神经生理学的例子,说明分层表型分析视角如何为精准精神病学带来有前景的未来方向;5)强调分层表型分析方法对精神病学的临床意义;6)讨论分层表型分析对精神病理学测量和建模最佳实践的方法学意义;7)为有兴趣在自己的工作中研究分层表型分析的读者介绍方法学资源。通过这样做,我们试图为分层表型分析方法提供依据,同时让有积极性的读者做好准备,在自己的工作中使用这些方法来推进精准精神病理学研究。