Other affiliations: University of Amsterdam
Bio: Pasha Dashtgard is an academic researcher from University of California, Irvine. The author has contributed to research in topics: Population & Convergent validity. The author has an hindex of 3, co-authored 3 publications receiving 47 citations. Previous affiliations of Pasha Dashtgard include University of Amsterdam.
TL;DR: The current study establishes sound psychometric properties of a new, brief, and freely available scale on psychological resilience, called the Resilience Evaluation Scale (RES), which may serve as a valuable instrument in research and in clinical practice.
Abstract: Background: Psychological resilience is a distinct factor that affects mental health outcomes after adversities. This study describes the development, validity and measurement invariance (MI) of a Dutch and English scale on psychological resilience, called the Resilience Evaluation Scale (RES). Methods: Separate online surveys with the Dutch and English version of the RES and hypothesized related measures were distributed in a Dutch- and English-speaking group, both drawn from the general population. Results: Exploratory factor analysis, using data from 522 respondents (n = 296 Dutch, n = 226 English), yielded a two-factor structure for the final 9-item RES. The factors reflected the hypothesized underlying constructs of psychological resilience: self-confidence and self-efficacy. The items and constructs of psychological resilience as measured by the RES were interpreted and conceptualized in the same way by both language groups, with the exception of one item. The RES showed good convergent validity and good internal consistency. Conclusions: The current study establishes sound psychometric properties of a new, brief, and freely available scale on psychological resilience. This study contributes to the identification and measurement of psychological resilience after adversities. The final 9-item RES may serve as a valuable instrument in research and in clinical practice.
TL;DR: Findings indicate that increases in posttraumatic growth accompany symptom decline in EMDR and BEP, and that these changes occur independent of whether the treatment specifically addresses post traumatic growth as therapeutic process.
TL;DR: It is found that solitary confinement is associated not just with mental, but also with physical health problems, and given the disproportionate use of solitary among incarcerated people of color, these symptoms are most likely to affect those populations.
Abstract: We examine how solitary confinement correlates with self-reported adverse physical health outcomes, and how such outcomes extend the understanding of the health disparities associated with incarceration. Using a mixed methods approach, we find that solitary confinement is associated not just with mental, but also with physical health problems. Given the disproportionate use of solitary among incarcerated people of color, these symptoms are most likely to affect those populations. Drawing from a random sample of prisoners (n = 106) in long-term solitary confinement in the Washington State Department of Corrections in 2017, we conducted semi-structured, in-depth interviews; Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) assessments; and systematic reviews of medical and disciplinary files for these subjects. We also conducted a paper survey of the entire long-term solitary confinement population (n = 225 respondents) and analyzed administrative data for the entire population of prisoners in the state in 2017 (n = 17,943). Results reflect qualitative content and descriptive statistical analysis. BPRS scores reflect clinically significant somatic concerns in 15% of sample. Objective specification of medical conditions is generally elusive, but that, itself, is a highly informative finding. Using subjective reports, we specify and analyze a range of physical symptoms experienced in solitary confinement: (1) skin irritations and weight fluctuation associated with the restrictive conditions of solitary confinement; (2) un-treated and mis-treated chronic conditions associated with the restrictive policies of solitary confinement; (3) musculoskeletal pain exacerbated by both restrictive conditions and policies. Administrative data analyses reveal disproportionate rates of racial/ethnic minorities in solitary confinement. This analysis raises the stakes for future studies to evaluate comparative prevalence of objective medical diagnoses and potential causal mechanisms for the physical symptoms specified here, and for understanding differential use of solitary confinement and its medically harmful sequelae.
TL;DR: Positive expectancies predict post-trauma resilience, and future research should identify moderators and examine positive expectancies as mechanisms of change in therapy.
Abstract: Objective The present meta-analysis consolidated research examining how positive expectancies (e.g., hope, self-efficacy, and optimism) may protect against the development of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Method Articles were identified by searching PILOTS, PsycINFO, PubMed, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses databases. Results Aggregated results from 154 studies indicated that positive expectancies were associated with lower levels of PTSD symptoms. This relationship was stronger for coping-specific self-efficacy (k = 38, r = -.49; -.54 to -.43) and hope (k = 20, r = -.34; -.39 to -.28) compared with general self-efficacy (k = 45, r = -.25; -.30 to -.20) and optimism (k = 59, r = -.29; -.33 to -.25) when examining cross-sectional studies, and results were consistent in prospective studies. Age and gender did not moderate the cross-sectional relationships. Conclusions These findings indicate that positive expectancies predict post-trauma resilience. Future research should identify moderators and examine positive expectancies as mechanisms of change in therapy.
TL;DR: Recent research regarding the scope and impact of traumatic stress, as well as prevention strategies for PTSD, have resulted in an improved understanding of its impact and more effective public health interventions.
Abstract: This article reviews recent evidence related to public health epidemiology and intervention for traumatic stress and PTSD. Recent evidence is presented regarding incidence of traumatic stress worldwide, as well as most frequent types of traumas, indicators of the public health burden of PTSD, and prevalence, predictors, and correlates of PTSD. Public health perspectives on intervention and treatment are delineated, and innovations in both psychosocial and psychopharmacological interventions are highlighted. PTSD has been associated with substantial medical and economic burden. Recent public health preventive innovations include integrated medical/behavioral health care, acute CBT and attention interventions, modifications to CBT protocols, use of novel and augmentative psychopharmacological agents, and use of technology. Recent research regarding the scope and impact of traumatic stress, as well as prevention strategies for PTSD, have resulted in an improved understanding of its impact and more effective public health interventions.
TL;DR: Increasingly sophisticated and nuanced conceptual frameworks, coupled with research leveraging advances in genetics, molecular biology, increased computational capacity, and larger, more diverse datasets suggest that the next decade of research could bring significant breakthroughs.
Abstract: Background: The ability to resist adverse outcomes, or demonstrate resilience after exposure to trauma is a thriving field of study. Yet ongoing debate persists regarding definitions of resilience, generalizability of the extant literature, neurobiological correlates, and a consensus research agenda. Objectives: To address these pressing questions, Drs. Christy Denckla and Karestan Koenen (co-chairs) convened a multidisciplinary panel including Drs. Dante Cicchetti, Laura Kubzansky, Soraya Seedat, Martin Teicher, and David Williams at the 2019 annual meeting of the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies (ISTSS). Questions included (1) how have definitions of resilience evolved, (2) what are the best approaches to capture the complexity of resilience processes, and (3) what are the most important areas for future research? Methods: The proceedings of this panel are summarized in this report, and prominent themes are synthesized and integrated. Results: While different definitions emerged, all shared a focus on conceptualizing resilience at multiple levels, from the biological to the social structural level, a focus on the dynamic nature of resilience, and a move away from conceptualizing resilience as only an individual trait. Critical areas for future research included 1) focused efforts to improve assessment that has international and cross-cultural validity, 2) developing within-study designs that employ more intensive phenotyping strategies, 3) examining outcomes across multiple levels and domains, and 4) integrating conceptualizations of resilience from the individual-level to the larger social context at the population health level. Conclusion: Increasingly sophisticated and nuanced conceptual frameworks, coupled with research leveraging advances in genetics, molecular biology, increased computational capacity, and larger, more diverse datasets suggest that the next decade of research could bring significant breakthroughs.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examined depression, anxiety, and stress among the Italian general population during the phase characterized by lockdown, and investigated the role of resilience as a potential predictor.
Abstract: Background The COVID-19 outbreak is severely affecting the overall mental health with unknown psychological consequences. Although a strong psychological impact is possible, scant evidence is available to date. Past studies have shown that resilience decreases the negative effects of stress. This study aimed to examine depression, anxiety, and stress among the Italian general population during the phase characterized by lockdown, and to investigate the role of resilience as a potential predictor. Methods A total sample of 6,314 Italian people participated in this study. Participants were recruited between March 29 and May 04 2020 through an online survey. The Depression Anxiety Stress Scales-21 (DASS-21) and the Resilience Scale (RS) were administered. Demographic data and lockdown related information were also collected. A correlational analysis was carried out to examine relationships between psychopathological domains and resilience. Three hierarchical regression analyses were conducted using the depression, anxiety, and stress as dependent variables and the resilience as independent variable controlling for age, gender, and education. COVID-19 specific variables were also included in the three regression analyses. A further exploratory analysis was carried out to examine which aspects of resilience predict depression, anxiety, and stress. Results The prevalence of moderate to extremely severe symptoms among participants was 32% for depression, 24.4% for anxiety, and 31.7% for stress. The sample mean scores on depression, anxiety, and stress were higher than the normal scores reported in the literature. Results of correlational analysis showed that resilience factors, such as meaningfulness, self-reliance, existential aloneness, and equanimity, are inversely associated with depression, anxiety, and stress. Results of regression analyses indicated that resilience was statically significant in predicting depression, anxiety, and stress. Geographic area of residence and infected acquaintances were also significant predictors. Regarding the resilience factors, results revealed that meaningfulness, perseverance, and equanimity were statistically significant in predicting all the DASS-21 scales. Conclusion About a third of respondents reported moderate to extremely severe depression, anxiety, and stress. The present study suggests that psychological resilience may independently contribute to low emotional distress and psychological ill-being. These findings can help explain the variability of individual responses during the COVID-19 outbreak.
University of Western Ontario1, University of Zagreb2, Duke University3, VA Palo Alto Healthcare System4, Maynooth University5, University of Pennsylvania6, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia7, University of Vienna8, Society of American Military Engineers9, University of New South Wales10, Kurume University11, University of Zurich12, Catholic University of the Maule13, University of Cape Town14, Ryerson University15
TL;DR: The development of and initial data on the Global Psychotrauma Screen (GPS), a brief instrument designed to screen for the wide range of potential outcomes of trauma, are presented, a first indication that the GPS is a feasible, reliable and valid tool.
Abstract: This letter provides an update on the activities of "The Global Collaboration on Traumatic Stress" (GC-TS) as first described by Schnyder et al. in 2017. It presents in further detail the projects of the first theme, in particular the development of and initial data on the Global Psychotrauma Screen (GPS), a brief instrument designed to screen for the wide range of potential outcomes of trauma. English language data and ongoing studies in several languages provide a first indication that the GPS is a feasible, reliable and valid tool, a tool that may be very useful in the current pandemic of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Further multi-language and cross-cultural validation is needed. Since the start of the GC-TS, new themes have been introduced to focus on in the coming years: a) Forcibly displaced persons, b) Global prevalence of stress and trauma related disorders, c) Socio-emotional development across cultures, and d) Collaborating to make traumatic stress research data "FAIR". The most recent theme added is that of Global crises, currently focusing on COVID-19-related projects.