Linking Temperament and Parenting Dimensions to the Co-occurrence of Internalizing and Externalizing Disorders in Childhood and Adolescence
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Child psychological disorders co-occur at a much greater rate than would be expected by chance. Comorbidity is known to occur both within and across diagnostic classes, such that even disorders lying at opposite ends of the diagnostic spectrum (i.e., internalizing and externalizing disorders) commonly co-occur. Although patterns of concurrent comorbidity have been widely studied, relatively little is know about how internalizing and externalizing disorders co-occur and influence one another over time. \n \nThe overall aim of this research was to investigate patterns of sequential comorbidity in a community-based sample of children, followed longitudinally from age 3 to age 16. Data was drawn from the Concordia Longitudinal Risk Project, a prospective, intergenerational study of children from disadvantaged neighborhoods (Study 1: N = 154; Study 2: N = 143). Three pathways to comorbidity were considered: 1) that symptoms of internalizing and externalizing disorders influence one another over time; 2) that common temperament risk factors are implicated in the co-development of internalizing and externalizing problems; and 3) that disorders co-occur over time because of the high degree of symptom overlap across disorders. Study 1 examined longitudinal patterns of internalizing and externalizing problems, finding an inhibitory effect of internalizing problems on the development of future externalizing problems. Results demonstrated that the presence of common risk factors (i.e., temperamental negative emotionality) best explained the co-occurrence between internalizing and externalizing problems and additionally, unique temperamental risk factors (i.e., sociability, activity) predicted their differentiation. Study 2 examined patterns of sequential comorbidity within the diagnostic class of internalizing disorders (i.e., anxiety and depression). Results from this study indicated a sequential progression from anxiety to depression, but that this association was primarily attributed to symptom overlap among questionnaires used to assess anxiety and depressive symptoms. Instead, the co-occurrence between anxiety and depression (at both the symptom and diagnostic level) was best explained by a common temperamental style characterized by high negative emotionality and low positive emotionality. Additionally, both studies revealed significant interactions between child characteristics (gender and temperament) and parenting in the prediction of children’s internalizing and externalizing problems. \n \nThe present studies build on previous work linking temperament and parenting practices to the development of specific childhood psychopathologies. Findings of common temperamental styles predicting the co-development of internalizing and externalizing problems across time, however, are novel. More broadly, these findings suggest that temperamental styles explain a large portion of the co-variation in symptomatology, both within and across diagnostic classes. Additionally, other temperamental styles and parenting practices, both separately and in combination, predict the differentiation of problems. These findings highlight the need for future studies to consider both concurrent and longitudinal patterns of comorbidity, as well as multiple potential pathways to comorbidity. This line of research has implications for etiology, intervention, prevention, and classification of child psychopathology.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».