Dataset Information

Transdiagnostic comparisons of intellectual abilities and work outcome in patients with mental disorders: multicentre study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Cognitive impairment is common in people with mental disorders, leading to transdiagnostic classification based on cognitive characteristics. However, few studies have used this approach for intellectual abilities and functional outcomes.

Aims

The present study aimed to classify people with mental disorders based on intellectual abilities and functional outcomes in a data-driven manner.

Method

Seven hundred and forty-nine patients diagnosed with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, major depression disorder or autism spectrum disorder and 1030 healthy control subjects were recruited from facilities in various regions of Japan. Two independent k-means cluster analyses were performed. First, intelligence variables (current estimated IQ, premorbid IQ, and IQ discrepancy) were included. Second, number of work hours per week was included instead of premorbid IQ.

Results

Four clusters were identified in the two analyses. These clusters were specifically characterised in terms of IQ discrepancy in the first cluster analysis, whereas the work variable was the most salient feature in the second cluster analysis. Distributions of clinical diagnoses in the two cluster analyses showed that all diagnoses were unevenly represented across the clusters.

Conclusions

Intellectual abilities and work outcomes are effective classifiers in transdiagnostic approaches. The results of our study also suggest the importance of diagnosis-specific strategies to support functional recovery in people with mental disorders.

SUBMITTER: Sumiyoshi C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9230699 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMental disorders (MDs) are one of the leading causes for workforce sickness absence and disability worldwide. The burden, costs and challenges are enormous for the individuals concerned, employers and society at large. Although most MDs are characterised by a high risk of relapse after treatment or by chronic courses, interventions that link medical-psychotherapeutic approaches with work-directed components to facilitate a sustainable return to work (RTW) are rare. This protocol describes the design of a study to evaluate the (cost-)effectiveness and implementation process of a multimodal, clinical and work-directed intervention, called RTW-PIA, aimed at employees with MDs to achieve sustainable RTW in Germany.MethodsThe study consists of an effectiveness, a health-economic and a process evaluation, designed as a two-armed, multicentre, randomised controlled trial, conducted in German psychiatric outpatient clinics. Sick-listed employees with MDs will receive either the 18-month RTW-PIA treatment in conjunction with care as usual, or care as usual only. RTW-PIA consists of a face-to-face individual RTW support, RTW aftercare group meetings, and web-based aftercare. Assessments will be conducted at baseline and 6, 12, 18 and 24 months after completion of baseline survey. The primary outcome is the employees´ achievement of sustainable RTW, defined as reporting less than six weeks of working days missed out due to sickness absence within 12 months after first RTW. Secondary outcomes include health-related quality of life, mental functioning, RTW self-efficacy, overall job satisfaction, severity of mental illness and work ability. The health-economic evaluation will be conducted from a societal and public health care perspective, as well as from the employer's perspective in a cost-benefit analysis. The design will be supplemented by a qualitative effect evaluation using pre- and post-interviews, and a multimethod process evaluation examining various predefined key process indicators from different stakeholder perspectives.DiscussionBy applying a comprehensive, multimethodological evaluation design, this study captures various facets of RTW-PIA. In case of promising results for sustainable RTW, RTW-PIA may be integrated into standard care within German psychiatric outpatient clinics.Trial registrationThe study was prospectively registered with the German Clinical Trials Register ( DRKS00026232 , 1 September 2021).

Project description:ObjectivesTransdiagnostic risk factors-disrupted processes common to psychopathology-link adverse childhood experiences to severe mental disorders (i.e. major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia spectrum disorders); however, transdiagnostic protective factors are understudied. The present study investigated the association between a positive mental health framework of protective intra- and interpersonal resources and severe mental disorders in individuals with adverse childhood experiences. We hypothesized that (1) individuals with adverse childhood experiences will experience more severe mental disorders and poorer intra- and interpersonal resources than those without adverse childhood experiences; (2) intrapersonal (e.g. general coping) and interpersonal resources (e.g. emotional support) will interact to predict severe mental disorders.MethodsA total of 1929 adults participated in this population-based study. Participants were assessed for adverse childhood experiences, severe mental disorders, and intra- and interpersonal resources (general coping, general affect, emotional support, interpersonal skills, spirituality, and personal growth and autonomy) via structured interviews and self-reports.ResultsAs hypothesized, individuals with adverse childhood experiences (62.6%) experienced more severe mental disorders and poorer intra- and interpersonal resources than those without adverse childhood experiences. Among those with adverse childhood experiences, emotional support interacted with general coping and general affect to predict severe mental disorders; general coping and general affect were negatively associated with severe mental disorders at high (+1 SD) and low (-1 SD) emotional support, respectively.ConclusionsThe present study identified interactions between specific intrapersonal (i.e. general coping and general affect) and interpersonal resources (i.e. emotional support); knowing among whom and when to intervene are essential for optimal treatment of adverse childhood experiences and severe mental disorders.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Most research on the prevalence, distribution, and psychiatric comorbidity of intellectual disability (ID) relies on clinical samples, limiting the generalizability and utility of ID assessment in a legal context. This study assessed ID prevalence in a population-representative sample of US adolescents and examined associations of ID with socio-demographic factors and mental disorders. METHODS:Data were drawn from the National Comorbidity Survey Adolescent Supplement (N = 6256). ID was defined as: (1) IQ ? 76, measured using the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test; (2) an adaptive behavior score ?76, and (3) age of onset ?18 measured using a validated scale. The Composite International Diagnostic Interview assessed 15 lifetime mental disorders. The Sheehan disability scale assessed disorder severity. We used logistic regression models to estimate differences in lifetime disorders for adolescents with and without ID. RESULTS:ID prevalence was 3.2%. Among adolescents with ID, 65.1% met lifetime criteria for a mental disorder. ID status was associated with specific phobia, agoraphobia, and bipolar disorder, but not behavior disorders after adjustment for socio-demographics. Adolescents with ID and mental disorders were significantly more likely to exhibit severe impairment than those without ID. CONCLUSIONS:These findings highlight how sample selection and overlap between ID and psychopathology symptoms might bias understanding of the mental health consequences of ID. For example, associations between ID and behavior disorders widely reported in clinical samples were not observed in a population-representative sample after adjustment for socio-demographic confounders. Valid assessment and understanding of these constructs may prove influential in the legal system by influencing treatment referrals and capital punishment decisions.General Scientific SummaryCurrent definitions of intellectual disability (ID) are based on three criteria: formal designation of low intelligence through artificial problem-solving tasks, impairment in one's ability to function in his/her social environment, and early age of onset. In a national population sample of adolescents, the majority of those with ID met criteria for a lifetime mental disorder. Phobias and bipolar disorder, but not behavior disorders, were elevated in adolescents with ID. Findings highlight the need to consider how behavioral problems are conceptualized and classified in people with ID.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Neurocognitive impairments robustly predict functional outcome. However, heterogeneity in neurocognition is common within diagnostic groups, and data-driven analyses reveal homogeneous neurocognitive subgroups cutting across diagnostic boundaries. AIMS:To determine whether data-driven neurocognitive subgroups of young people with emerging mental disorders are associated with 3-year functional course. METHOD:Model-based cluster analysis was applied to neurocognitive test scores across nine domains from 629 young people accessing mental health clinics. Cluster groups were compared on demographic, clinical and substance-use measures. Mixed-effects models explored associations between cluster-group membership and socio-occupational functioning (using the Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale) over 3 years, adjusted for gender, premorbid IQ, level of education, depressive, positive, negative and manic symptoms, and diagnosis of a primary psychotic disorder. RESULTS:Cluster analysis of neurocognitive test scores derived three subgroups described as 'normal range' (n = 243, 38.6%), 'intermediate impairment' (n = 252, 40.1%), and 'global impairment' (n = 134, 21.3%). The major mental disorder categories (depressive, anxiety, bipolar, psychotic and other) were represented in each neurocognitive subgroup. The global impairment subgroup had lower functioning for 3 years of follow-up; however, neither the global impairment (B = 0.26, 95% CI -0.67 to 1.20; P = 0.581) or intermediate impairment (B = 0.46, 95% CI -0.26 to 1.19; P = 0.211) subgroups differed from the normal range subgroup in their rate of change in functioning over time. CONCLUSIONS:Neurocognitive impairment may follow a continuum of severity across the major syndrome-based mental disorders, with data-driven neurocognitive subgroups predictive of functional course. Of note, the global impairment subgroup had longstanding functional impairment despite continuing engagement with clinical services.

Project description:BackgroundEntitlement to sickness benefits is a legal process requiring health-related reduced work capacity confirmed by a physician via a sickness certificate. However, there is a knowledge gap concerning physicians' clinical practice of work capacity assessments for patients with common mental disorders (CMD). Physicians claim more knowledge and skills in how to actually do the assessments. The aim of this study was to explore physicians' tacit knowledge of performing assessments of capacity to work and the need for sickness absence in patients with depression and anxiety disorders.MethodsWe performed a qualitative study with open-ended interviews and a short video vignette of a physician and a patient with depression as stimuli. Participating physicians (n = 24) were specialized in general practice, occupational health or psychiatry and experienced in treating patients with depression and anxiety. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Inductive content analysis was used as the analytical tool.ResultsFive categories were identified. Category 1 identified work capacity assessment as doing a jigsaw puzzle without any master model. The physicians both identified and created the pieces of the puzzle, mainly by facilitating strategies to make the patient a better supplier of essential information. The finished puzzle made up a highly individualized comprehensive picture required for adequate assessment. Categories 2-4 identified the particular essential pieces of information the participants used, relating to the patient's disorder, capacity in the work place and contextual everyday life. For the sickness absence assessment, apart from decreased work capacity, the physicians also took particulars of the work place into account; e.g. could the work place handle an employee with reduced capacity.ConclusionsPhysicians' tacit knowledge of assessing work capacity and the need for sickness absence for patients with CMD was identified as doing a jigsaw puzzle. The physicians became identifiers and creators of the pieces of the puzzle using a broad palette of essential information. Our findings contribute to the knowledge gap on clinical assessment and can be used as an educational tool. Because they are based on the professions' tacit knowledge, acceptance of the model can be expected to be high.