Journal article
Whitney R. Ringwald, M. Forbes, A. Wright
Psychological Medicine, vol. 53(2), 2021, pp. 533-546
Psychological Medicine, vol. 53(2), 2021, pp. 533-546
DOI
Semantic Scholar
PubMed
Cite
Cite
APA
Click to copy
Ringwald, W. R., Forbes, M., & Wright, A. (2021). Meta-analysis of structural evidence for the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) model. Psychological Medicine, 53(2), 533–546. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291721001902
Chicago/Turabian
Click to copy
Ringwald, Whitney R., M. Forbes, and A. Wright. “Meta-Analysis of Structural Evidence for the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) Model.” Psychological Medicine 53, no. 2 (2021): 533–546.
MLA
Click to copy
Ringwald, Whitney R., et al. “Meta-Analysis of Structural Evidence for the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) Model.” Psychological Medicine, vol. 53, no. 2, 2021, pp. 533–46, doi:10.1017/S0033291721001902.
BibTeX Click to copy
@article{whitney2021a,
title = {Meta-analysis of structural evidence for the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) model},
year = {2021},
issue = {2},
journal = {Psychological Medicine},
pages = {533-546},
volume = {53},
doi = {10.1017/S0033291721001902},
author = {Ringwald, Whitney R. and Forbes, M. and Wright, A.}
}
Abstract
BACKGROUND The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) is a classification system that seeks to organize psychopathology using quantitative evidence - yet the current model was established by narrative review. This meta-analysis provides a quantitative synthesis of literature on transdiagnostic dimensions of psychopathology to evaluate the validity of the HiTOP framework.
METHODS Published studies estimating factor-analytic models from diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM) diagnoses were screened. A total of 120,596 participants from 35 studies assessing 23 DSM diagnoses were included in the meta-analytic models. Data were pooled into a meta-analytic correlation matrix using a random effects model. Exploratory factor analyses were conducted using the pooled correlation matrix. A hierarchical structure was estimated by extracting one to five factors representing levels of the HiTOP framework, then calculating congruence coefficients between factors at sequential levels.
RESULTS Five transdiagnostic dimensions fit the DSM diagnoses well (comparative fit index = 0.92, root mean square error of approximation = 0.07, and standardized root-mean-square residual = 0.03). Most diagnoses had factor loadings >|0.30| on the expected factors, and congruence coefficients between factors indicated a hierarchical structure consistent with the HiTOP framework.
CONCLUSIONS A model closely resembling the HiTOP framework fit the data well and placement of DSM diagnoses within transdiagnostic dimensions were largely confirmed, supporting it as valid structure for conceptualizing and organizing psychopathology. Results also suggest transdiagnostic research should (1) use traits, narrow symptoms, and dimensional measures of psychopathology instead of DSM diagnoses, (2) assess a broader array of constructs, and (3) increase focus on understudied pathologies.
