No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Laboratory Testing and Imaging Studies in Psychiatry
Objective Psychological treatments for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and complex posttraumatic stress disorder are becoming more prevalent, however prognosis for these conditions remains poor. More recently quality of life has been investigated as an alternative method of investigating success of interventions. This research had two goals: to investigate how three individual factors (personal responsibility, personal agency and resourcefulness) were able to predict quality of life among individuals with PTSD or CPTSD, and provide support for the theory or positive disintegration. Method Patients with PTSD or CPTSD (N=114) were administered an anonymous online survey to assess the relationship between personal responsibility, personal agency and resourcefulness on the quality of life in people with PTSD or CPTSD. The survey included demographic information as well as four empirically tested scales: The Quality of Life Scale, Personal Control and Responsibility Measure, Future Scale and Resourcefulness Skills Scale. were administered. Results Findings suggested that personal agency and resourcefulness have a significant impact on improving quality of life, while personal responsibility did not significantly affect quality of life. Effect size was 0.75, suggesting a large effect size. Conclusions Resourcefulness was the largest predictor of quality of life, while personal agency also significantly predicted quality of life. Personal responsibility was not predictive of quality of life. Increasing resourcefulness both personal and social and increasing agency in victims of trauma has promising outcomes for people suffering from PTSD or CPTSD. The results also provided support for the theory of positive disintegration, as a possible theory for recovery from trauma
Key words: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, Personal Responsibility, Personal Agency, Resourcefulness, Quality of Life.
Brain imaging provides ever more sensitive measures of structure and function relevant to human psychology and has revealed correlates for virtually every psychiatric disorder. Yet it plays no accepted role in psychiatric diagnosis beyond ruling out medical factors such as tumors or traumatic brain injuries. Why is brain imaging not used in the diagnosis of primary psychiatric disorders, such as depression, bipolar disease, schizophrenia, and ADHD? The present article addresses this question. It reviews the state of the art in psychiatric imaging, including diagnostic and other applications, and explains the nonutility of diagnostic imaging in terms of aspects of both the current state of imaging and the current nature of psychiatric nosology. The likely future path by which imaging-based diagnoses will be incorporated into psychiatry is also discussed. By reviewing one well-known attempt to use SPECT-scanning in psychiatric diagnosis, the article examines a real-world practice that illustrates several related points: the appeal of the idea of image-assisted diagnosis for physicians, patients and families, despite a lack of proven effectiveness, and the mismatch between the categories and dimensions of current nosology and those suggested by imaging.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.