What question did this study set out to answer?

The aim is to establish the metabiopsychosocial model (MBPS) as a comprehensive and falsifiable framework beyond existing models.

May 31, 2026Open Access

Modelo metabiopsicosocial del sufrimiento y la transformación humana: tesis teórico-metodológica, protocolo preregistrable, condiciones de validación empírica y derivación Q1

Key Points

The aim is to establish the metabiopsychosocial model (MBPS) as a comprehensive and falsifiable framework beyond existing models.
Theoretical synthesis combining PRISMA-ScR guidelines, statistical analysis plans, and construct analysis.
Development of operational definitions and hypotheses without empirical data.
Framework for bias control and feasibility simulations with planned Q1 substudies.
The MBPS framework is positioned as a viable model for understanding human suffering, requiring empirical testing of its core constructs.
Operational definitions and hypotheses are established to guide future research efforts.
The dissertation identifies gaps in empirical evidence regarding the MBPS and outlines validation steps for its application.

Abstract

Problem. Human suffering is impoverished when reduced to brain, trauma, biography, environment, society, or karma. Objective. This dissertation defends the metabiopsychosocial model (MBPS) as a non-colonizing and falsifiable architecture against the standard biopsychosocial model, specifying when the meta plane adds incremental validity and when it must be reduced or reformulated. Method and status. The manuscript provides a theory-method synthesis guided by PRISMA-ScR, construct analysis, evidence hierarchy, a COSMIN-Delphi plan, a coding manual, and a confirmatory statistical analysis plan; however, the PRISMA-ScR review is protocolized and has not yet been completed through final searching, dual screening, and duplicated extraction. The M Scale v0.4 has no Delphi panel, cognitive interviews, pilot study, or human data yet. The author's unpublished primary corpus is used as a generative source of hypotheses, not as external evidence. Outputs of this version. The contribution consists of operational definitions, falsifiable hypotheses, anti-colonization criteria, statistical models, missing-data handling, bias controls, feasibility simulations, and two narrowly specified Q1 substudies. Conclusion. MBPS is defensible as a conceptual architecture and empirical program only if M is tested as a minimal construct of intention, value, reification/dereification, and ethical congruence, not as a supernatural variable or a substitute for B, P, or S.

Read Full Paperexternally

Mark Helpful

Bookmark

Relay

View Full Paper