European eating disorders review : the journal of the Eating Disorders Association · 2021
A systematic review of network analysis studies in eating disorders: Is time to broaden the core psychopathology to non specific symptoms.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Monteleone Alessio Maria, Cascino Giammarco
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Network theory considers mental disorders as the product of symptom interaction. A growing number of studies employing this methodology has been conducted in eating disorders (EDs). We aimed to review those studies to provide evidence and limitations for a novel conceptualisation of EDs.
METHODS: According to PRISMA guidelines and PICOS criteria, studies eligible for inclusion were those employing network analysis in people with a clinically defined diagnosis of ED. Twenty-five studies were included and were analysed in relation to diagnosis, comorbidity, and treatment outcome.
RESULTS: Despite the central role of overvaluation of body shape and weight and cognitive restraint across ED diagnoses, ineffectiveness, interoceptive awareness and affective problems appear central symptoms. Ineffectiveness and interoceptive awareness emerge as bridge symptoms promoting comorbidity in people with anorexia nervosa and in mixed ED samples. Although few studies assessed treatment outcome, there is evidence supporting the predictive role of central network nodes.
CONCLUSIONS: Ineffectiveness, interoceptive ability and affective problems may be included in the core ED psychopathology, in addition to ED-specific symptoms. Network analysis is a promising method to reconceptualize comorbidity. Future studies are recommended to include general psychopathology in ED networks, to assess connections with the external field and clinical meaning of network connectivity.
METHODS: According to PRISMA guidelines and PICOS criteria, studies eligible for inclusion were those employing network analysis in people with a clinically defined diagnosis of ED. Twenty-five studies were included and were analysed in relation to diagnosis, comorbidity, and treatment outcome.
RESULTS: Despite the central role of overvaluation of body shape and weight and cognitive restraint across ED diagnoses, ineffectiveness, interoceptive awareness and affective problems appear central symptoms. Ineffectiveness and interoceptive awareness emerge as bridge symptoms promoting comorbidity in people with anorexia nervosa and in mixed ED samples. Although few studies assessed treatment outcome, there is evidence supporting the predictive role of central network nodes.
CONCLUSIONS: Ineffectiveness, interoceptive ability and affective problems may be included in the core ED psychopathology, in addition to ED-specific symptoms. Network analysis is a promising method to reconceptualize comorbidity. Future studies are recommended to include general psychopathology in ED networks, to assess connections with the external field and clinical meaning of network connectivity.