Practice considerations for behavioral therapies for depression and anxiety in midlife women

Cognitive-behavioral therapies (CBTs) are the most widely studied form psychotherapy for disorders like depression and anxiety. Nonetheless, there is heterogeneity in response to CBTs vs. other treatments. Researchers have become increasingly interested in using pre-treatment individual differences (i.e., moderators) to match patients to the most effective treatments for them. Several methods to combine multiple variables to create precision treatment rules (PTRs) that identify subgroups have been proposed. We review the rationale behind multivariable PTRs as well as studies that have used different PTRs. We identify conceptual and methodological issues in the literature. Multivariable treatment assignment is a promising avenue of research. Nonetheless, effect sizes appear to be small and most of the samples that have been used to study these questions have been grossly underpowered to detect small effects. We recommend researchers explore multivariable treatment selection strategies, particularly those resembling risk-stratification, in heterogeneous samples of patients undergoing low-intensity CBTs vs. realistic minimal controls.

Download Full-text

Lifetime History of Depression and Anxiety Disorders as a Predictor of Quality of Life in Midlife Women in the Absence of Current Illness Episodes

Archives of General Psychiatry ◽

10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2011.1578 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 69 (5) ◽

pp. 484 ◽

Cited By ~ 24

Author(s):

Yuefang Chang

Keyword(s):

Quality Of Life ◽

Anxiety Disorders ◽

Midlife Women ◽

Depression And Anxiety ◽

Lifetime History ◽

History Of ◽

History Of Depression

Download Full-text

Individual Differences and Hemispheric Asymmetry While Processing Emotional Words

Journal of Individual Differences ◽

10.1027/1614-0001/a000137 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 35 (3) ◽

pp. 137-143 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Lindsay M. Niccolai ◽

Thomas Holtgraves

Keyword(s):

Individual Differences ◽

Hemispheric Asymmetry ◽

Past Research ◽

Decision Task ◽

Depression And Anxiety ◽

Hemispheric Differences ◽

Affective Valence ◽

Emotional Words ◽

Emotion Words ◽

The Right

This research examined differences in the perception of emotion words as a function of individual differences in subclinical levels of depression and anxiety. Participants completed measures of depression and anxiety and performed a lexical decision task for words varying in affective valence (but equated for arousal) that were presented briefly to the right or left visual field. Participants with a lower level of depression demonstrated hemispheric asymmetry with a bias toward words presented to the left hemisphere, but participants with a higher level of depression displayed no hemispheric differences. Participants with a lower level of depression also demonstrated a bias toward positive words, a pattern that did not occur for participants with a higher level of depression. A similar pattern occurred for anxiety. Overall, this study demonstrates how variability in levels of depression and anxiety can influence the perception of emotion words, with patterns that are consistent with past research.

Download Full-text

Dimensionality and Reliability Assessment of the Pain Patient Profile Questionnaire

European Journal of Psychological Assessment ◽

10.1027/1015-5759.24.1.22 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 24 (1) ◽

pp. 22-26 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Brian E. McGuire ◽

Michael J. Hogan ◽

Todd G. Morrison

Keyword(s):

Self Report ◽

Pain Patient ◽

Fit Indices ◽

Depression And Anxiety ◽

Oblique Rotation ◽

Pain Experience ◽

Patient Profile ◽

Adequate Representation ◽

Pain Patients ◽

Report Measure

Abstract. Objective: To factor analyze the Pain Patient Profile questionnaire (P3; Tollison & Langley, 1995 ), a self-report measure of emotional distress in respondents with chronic pain. Method: An unweighted least squares factor analysis with oblique rotation was conducted on the P3 scores of 160 pain patients to look for evidence of three distinct factors (i.e., Depression, Anxiety, and Somatization). Results: Fit indices suggested that three distinct factors, accounting for 32.1%, 7.0%, and 5.5% of the shared variance, provided an adequate representation of the data. However, inspection of item groupings revealed that this structure did not map onto the Depression, Anxiety, and Somatization division purportedly represented by the P3. Further, when the analysis was re-run, eliminating items that failed to meet salience criteria, a two-factor solution emerged, with Factor 1 representing a mixture of Depression and Anxiety items and Factor 2 denoting Somatization. Each of these factors correlated significantly with a subsample's assessment of pain intensity. Conclusion: Results were not congruent with the P3's suggested tripartite model of pain experience and indicate that modifications to the scale may be required.

Download Full-text