Search

Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) has been associated with a wide range of biological and neurocognitive findings, which could assist in the search for biomarkers. We conducted an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses to assess and grade the strength of the evidence of the association between OCD and several potential diagnostic biomarkers while controlling for several potential biases. Twenty-four systematic reviews and meta-analyses were included, comprising 352 individual studies, more than 10,000 individuals with OCD, and covering 73 potential biomarkers. OCD was significantly associated with several neurocognitive biomarkers, with varying degrees of evidence, ranging from weak to convincing. A number of biochemical, neurophysiological, and neuroimaging biomarkers also showed statistically significant, albeit weak, associations with OCD. Analyses in unmedicated samples (123 studies) weakened the strength of the evidence for most biomarkers or rendered them non-significant. None of the biomarkers seem to have sufficient sensitivity and specificity to become a diagnostic biomarker. A more promising avenue for future biomarker research in OCD might be the prediction of clinical outcomes rather than diagnosis., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: A multitude of risk/protective factors for anxiety and obsessive-compulsive disorders have been proposed. We conducted an umbrella review to summarize the evidence of the associations between risk/protective factors and each of the following disorders: specific phobia, social anxiety disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, panic disorder, and obsessive-compulsive disorder, and to assess the strength of this evidence whilst controlling for several biases., Methods: Publication databases were searched for systematic reviews and meta-analyses examining associations between potential risk/protective factors and each of the disorders investigated. The evidence of the association between each factor and disorder was graded into convincing, highly suggestive, suggestive, weak, or non-significant according to a standardized classification based on: number of cases (>1000), random-effects p-values, 95% prediction intervals, confidence interval of the largest study, heterogeneity between studies, study effects, and excess of significance., Results: Nineteen systematic reviews and meta-analyses were included, corresponding to 216 individual studies covering 427 potential risk/protective factors. Only one factor association (early physical trauma as a risk factor for social anxiety disorder, OR 2.59, 95% CI 2.17-3.1) met all the criteria for convincing evidence. When excluding the requirement for more than 1000 cases, five factor associations met the other criteria for convincing evidence and 22 met the remaining criteria for highly suggestive evidence., Conclusions: Although the amount and quality of the evidence for most risk/protective factors for anxiety and obsessive-compulsive disorders is limited, a number of factors significantly increase the risk for these disorders, may have potential prognostic ability and inform prevention.

The temporal stability of obsessive-compulsive symptom dimensions was studied in a nonclinical student sample. The Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory--Revised was administered twice to 132 undergraduate students during a 2-year period. There were no significant changes in symptom dimension scores between the baseline and follow-up, except for the Obsessing scale. The score of each dimension at follow-up was strongly and uniquely predicted from the score on the same dimension at baseline. The results indicate that obsessive-compulsive symptom dimensions tend to be temporally stable in nonclinical participants, replicating similar studies in clinical populations.

The psychometric properties of a Spanish version of the Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory-Revised (OCI-R) were examined in a non-clinical student sample (n=381). A confirmatory factor analysis replicated the original six-factor structure. The total and each of the subscales of the Spanish OCI-R demonstrated moderate to good internal consistency and test-retest reliability, moderate convergent validity and good divergent validity. The Spanish version of the OCI-R retains the sound psychometric properties of the original version.