Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-skm99 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T05:25:11.696Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Mediation Models From Childhood Adversity to Depressiveness in Patients At-risk for Psychosis and in Help-seeking Controls

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 April 2020

S. Schmidt
Affiliation:
University Hospital of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Psychotherapy Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
S. Ruhrmann
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
B.G. Schimmelmann
Affiliation:
University Hospital of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Psychotherapy Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
J. Klosterkötter
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
F. Schultze-Lutter
Affiliation:
University Hospital of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Psychotherapy Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Introduction

Childhood adversity (CA) is associated with poor mental health outcomes including psychotic symptoms.

Objectives

However, the mechanisms linking CA to the development of psychosis are still poorly understood – in both their nature and the specificity of links for psychosis development. Possible links (mediators) are an excessive use of external attributions, dysfunctional coping patterns, and depressive symptoms that were associated with CA in healthy subjects but have not been studied in patients at-risk for psychosis.

Aims

Therefore, pathways models from CA to depressiveness were generated based on literature and examined separately in two samples by structural equation modeling: 137 patients at-risk for psychosis and 228 help-seeking controls.

Methods

Mediators between CA (Trauma and Distress Scale) and depressiveness (BDI II) were attribution style, self-efficacy (Competence and Control Beliefs Questionnaire) and coping strategies (Stress-Coping-Questionnaire).

Results

Both final models showed 3 pathways running from CA to external attributions and low-self-efficacy, from these beliefs to maladaptive coping strategies and from there to depressiveness (CFI>0.9, RMSEA<0.1). In addition, the at-risk group displayed an alternative effect of CA on maladaptive coping.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that CA generally increases the risk for mental health problems by the development of dysfunctional attributions and low self-efficacy that lead to maladaptive coping strategies and heightened levels of depressiveness with an additional effect of CA on maladaptive coping in at-risk patients. Thus, integrated interventions targeting these factors may enhance resilience and, thereby, prevent both the persistence of distressing symptoms and their progression to mental disorders, including psychosis.

Type
Article: 0810
Copyright
Copyright © European Psychiatric Association 2015
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.