S225. STRESS SENSITIZATION IN INDIVIDUALS WITH SUBCLINICAL SYMPTOMS INDICATIVE OF PSYCHOPATHOLOGY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Repeated exposure to stressors can sensitize the stress system and in turn propel the development of various psychiatric disorders. Stress sensitization can be identified through stress reactivity patterns. Individuals at risk of developing psychosis for example, already show aberrant patterns of daily stress reactivity prior to clinical diagnosis, with blunted physiological responses to mild stressors that could be indicative of a dysregulation of the hypothalamic pituitary adrenocortical axis. In parallel, while they do not show significant physiological responses to the stressor, they report significant increases in negative affect (NA) ensuing from it. This study aims to test whether sensitization can already be observed in healthy volunteers exhibiting only subclinical symptoms. Methods Thirty, first year students took part in two laboratory sessions where stress was induced using a modified version of the Montreal Imaging Stress Task (MIST), one week apart. Baseline measures of psychopathology were collected using the Symptom Checklist 90 (SCL-90). During the laboratory sessions, continuous ECG signals were collected, as well as five subjective stress measures per session. We calculated average heart rate (HR) and heart rate variability (HRV) per condition. Multilevel models testing the three-way interaction between psychopathology, session, and condition with individual data points nested within days were used to assess overall psychopathology and more specifically subclinical symptoms of psychosis in repeated stress reactivity. Results Mixed models investigating repeated stress in overall psychopathology indicates a significant three way interaction for HR (β = -.15, SE=.01, p< .01), and HRV (β = -.01, SE=.04, p= .02), with individuals scoring lower on the scl-90 exhibiting comparable increases in HR and decreases in HRV on both sessions. In contrast, individuals scoring higher on the scale show a blunted response on the second session compared to the first. Analyses with stress (β = .03, SE= .01, p= .01), and NA (β = .06, SE=.29, p= .03) show that generally the stressor elicited a mild negative subjective response with a decrease in stress and NA that was comparable on both sessions for individuals scoring lower on the scl-90. No subjective reactivity was reported on the second session for participants scoring high on the scale. Likewise, models that focused on subclinical psychotic symptoms found similar significant interactions. In the same way as in the analyses with psychopathology we find significant interactions for stress (β = .36, SE= .11, p< .01), NA (β = .06, SE=.03, p= .03) HR (β = -1.08, SE=.13 p< .01), and HRV (β = 3.72, SE=.39, p< .01). Analyses show the same comparable patterns of reactivity in both sessions for participants low in psychosis, and a blunted response on the second session for participants high in psychosis. Discussion Symptoms of psychopathology and more specifically psychosis are related to blunted stress reactivity during a second exposure to the same stressor. Psychopathological vulnerability may be reflected in a blunting response to repeated stress in healthy individuals with subclinical symptoms. Findings suggest that dysregulation in the stress system may be present long before individual complaints, further highlighting the need for early intervention.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".