Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Psychiatric evaluation of anxiety and depression is currently based on self-reported symptoms and their classification into discrete disorders. Yet the substantial overlap between these disorders as well as their within-disorder heterogeneity may contribute to the mediocre success rates of treatments. The proposed research examines a new framework for diagnosis that is based on alterations in underlying cognitive mechanisms. In line with the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) approach, the current study directly compares disorder-specific and transdiagnostic cognitive patterns in predicting the severity of anxiety and depression symptoms. The sample included 237 individuals exhibiting differing levels of anxiety and depression symptoms, as measured by the STAI-T and BDI-II. Random Forest regressors were used to analyze their performance on a battery of six computerized cognitive-behavioral tests targeting selective and spatial attention, expectancy, interpretation, memory, and cognitive control biases. Unique anxiety-specific biases were found, as well as shared anxious-depressed bias patterns. These cognitive biases exhibited relatively high fitting rates when predicting symptom severity (questionnaire scores common range 0–60, MAE = 6.03, RMSE = 7.53). Interpretation and expectancy biases exhibited the highest association with symptoms, above all other individual biases. Although internal validation methods were applied, models may suffer from potential overfitting due to sample size limitations. In the context of the ongoing dispute regarding symptom-centered versus transdiagnostic approaches, the current study provides a unique comparison of these two views, yielding a novel intermediate approach. The results support the use of mechanism-based dimensional diagnosis for adding precision and objectivity to future psychiatric evaluations.
Richter et al. (Tue,) studied this question.