4.7 Article

Anxiety sensitivity, its stability and longitudinal association with severity of anxiety symptoms

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-39931-7

关键词

-

资金

  1. Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development (ZonMw) [10-000-1002]
  2. VU University Medical Center
  3. GGZ inGeest
  4. Leiden University Medical Center
  5. Leiden University
  6. GGZ Rivierduinen
  7. University Medical Center Groningen
  8. University of Groningen
  9. Lentis
  10. GGZ Friesland
  11. GGZ Drenthe
  12. Rob Giel Onderzoekscentrum

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Anxiety sensitivity is associated with the onset of panic attacks, anxiety, and other common mental disorders. Anxiety sensitivity is usually seen as a relative stable trait. However, previous studies were inconclusive regarding the longitudinal stability of anxiety sensitivity and differed in study designs and outcomes. The current study examines the stability of anxiety sensitivity over time and its longitudinal associations with severity of anxiety symptoms. Participants from the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety with and without an anxiety, depressive, or comorbid anxiety-depressive disorder diagnosis were included (N= 2052). Stability in anxiety sensitivity over two year follow-up and the longitudinal association between the change in anxiety sensitivity and change in severity of anxiety symptoms were tested. Results indicated that two-year stability of anxiety sensitivity was high (r= 0.72), yet this test-retest estimate leaves room for changes in anxiety sensitivity in some individuals as well. Change in anxiety sensitivity was positively associated with change in severity of anxiety symptoms (B = 0.64 in univariable analysis and B= 0.52 in multivariable analysis). The longitudinal association of anxiety sensitivity with severity of anxiety symptoms indicates that targeting anxiety sensitivity may be of additional benefit in clinical practice.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据