Wittchen H U
Clinical Psychology, Max Planck Institute of Psychiatry, München, Germany.
Br J Psychiatry Suppl. 1996 Jun(30):9-16.
Comorbidity has become an increasingly popular theme in psychiatry and clinical psychology, although its heuristic value was recognised long ago. Frequently used in research and practice, no definition of comorbidity is uniformly accepted and it has no comprehensive and coherent theoretical framework. These factors have led to substantial variation in the magnitude of comorbidity across studies. The variability in the definition, assessment and design of comorbidity studies has led to an increasingly complex and confusing picture about the potential value of this concept. The full exploration of mechanisms of comorbidity requires an interdisciplinary approach to investigating nosology, assessment, and underlying models of comorbidity, as well as experimental study designs beyond the scope of clinical and epidemiological studies. A more precise specification of comorbidity patterns might help identify common biochemical and cognitive markers relevant in the aetiology of specific mental disorders as well as comorbid conditions. Critical issues that might help us understand and explain the variability of findings are described.
共病已成为精神病学和临床心理学中一个越来越热门的主题,尽管其启发式价值早在很久以前就得到了认可。共病在研究和实践中经常被使用,但目前并没有一个统一被接受的定义,也没有一个全面且连贯的理论框架。这些因素导致了不同研究中共病发生率的显著差异。共病研究在定义、评估和设计方面的变异性,使得关于这一概念的潜在价值的情况变得越来越复杂和令人困惑。对共病机制的全面探索需要一种跨学科的方法来研究疾病分类学、共病评估及潜在模型,以及超出临床和流行病学研究范围的实验性研究设计。对共病模式进行更精确的描述,可能有助于识别与特定精神障碍以及共病状况病因相关的常见生化和认知标志物。文中描述了一些可能有助于我们理解和解释研究结果变异性的关键问题。