ABSTRACT
Why is psychiatry unable to define clinically useful biomarkers? We explore this question from the vantage of data and decision science and consider biomarkers as a form of phenotypic data that resolves a well-defined clinical decision. We introduce a framework that systematizes different forms of phenotypic data and further introduce the concept of decision model to describe the strategies a clinician uses to seek out, combine, and act on clinical data. Though many medical specialties rely on quantitative clinical data and operationalized decision models, we observe that, in psychiatry, clinical data are gathered and used in idiosyncratic decision models that exist solely in the clinician's mind and therefore are outside empirical evaluation. This, we argue, is a fundamental reason why psychiatry is unable to define clinically useful biomarkers: because psychiatry does not currently quantify clinical data, decision models cannot be operationalized and, in the absence of an operationalized decision model, it is impossible to define how a biomarker might be of use. Here, psychiatry might benefit from digital technologies that have recently emerged specifically to quantify clinically relevant facets of human behavior. We propose that digital tools might help psychiatry in two ways: first, by quantifying data already present in the standard clinical interaction and by allowing decision models to be operationalized and evaluated; second, by testing whether new forms of data might have value within an operationalized decision model. We reference successes from other medical specialties to illustrate how quantitative data and operationalized decision models improve patient care.
ABSTRACT
This column describes a unique model for integrating behavioral health services into two New Jersey federally qualified health centers (FQHCs). The pilot project, funded by a private foundation grant, offers a lens for exploring the distinct challenges and opportunities faced by FQHCs serving diverse populations. The behavioral health services provided through this project were comprehensive, including behavioral health care, chronic disease management, and computerized cognitive-behavioral therapy. Although many changes to health center structure and staffing were required, building on existing infrastructure allowed substantial progress toward implementation of an integrated (and eventually self-sustaining) care system in one year. The challenges facing FQHCs wishing to integrate behavioral health services into their routine operation will vary; this project can provide a blueprint by which comprehensive behavioral health care can be integrated into existing medical clinic services.
Subject(s)
Community Health Centers/organization & administration , Mental Health Services/organization & administration , Primary Health Care/organization & administration , Humans , New Jersey , Pilot ProjectsABSTRACT
Developmental stuttering is a speech disorder most likely due to a heritable form of developmental dysmyelination impairing the function of the speech-motor system. Speech-induced brain-activation patterns in persons who stutter (PWS) are anomalous in various ways; the consistency of these aberrant patterns is a matter of ongoing debate. Here, we present a hierarchical series of coordinate-based meta-analyses addressing this issue. Two tiers of meta-analyses were performed on a 17-paper dataset (202 PWS; 167 fluent controls). Four large-scale (top-tier) meta-analyses were performed, two for each subject group (PWS and controls). These analyses robustly confirmed the regional effects previously postulated as "neural signatures of stuttering" (Brown, Ingham, Ingham, Laird, & Fox, 2005) and extended this designation to additional regions. Two smaller-scale (lower-tier) meta-analyses refined the interpretation of the large-scale analyses: (1) a between-group contrast targeting differences between PWS and controls (stuttering trait); and (2) a within-group contrast (PWS only) of stuttering with induced fluency (stuttering state).
