Consortium Psychiatricum

BACKGROUND: Anorexia nervosa (AN) is characterized by heterogeneous clinical manifestations, which complicates diagnosis and treatment. It is important to define the clinical variants and therapeutic targets for AN.

AIM: To identify empirical patient phenotypes within the AN diagnostic category using Latent Class Analysis (LCA) of clinically assessed psychopathological symptoms.

METHODS: Psychiatrists clinically assessed psychopathological symptoms of AN using an original checklist (57 symptoms in total) and the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (M.I.N.I.) was used to identify mental disorders. Patients completed the Symptom Check List-90-Revised questionnaire (SCL-90-R) to self-assess psychopathological symptoms and distress. Clinically homogeneous patient subgroups were identified using LCA.

RESULTS: A total of 115 patients with AN were examined. Based on the LCA, four patient groups (C1–C4) were identified, with high classification certainty (R²=0.908), model significance (p<0.001), and clear separation of the latent groups (class separation index = 0.957). ED-related symptoms were key determinants of class formation only in 68 patients (59%) — those in C1 and C3. No statistically significant differences were found between classes on any SCL-90-R subscales or most M.I.N.I. diagnoses. In C1 (n=41), core ED symptoms dominated: dysmorphophobia, fears related to eating, weight gain, loss of control. In C2, low frequencies are observed for core ED symptoms; this group was characterized by a high incidence of sleep disturbances, anxiety, apathy, melancholy, and anhedonia. C3 represents a polymorphic clinical profile with a combination of core ED symptoms, affective symptoms, thought disorders, cognitive impairments, and sleep disturbances. C4 was defined by the presence of hypochondriacal concerns, somatoform autonomic symptoms, and apathy; none of the core ED symptoms were typical for C4.

CONCLUSION: Four empirically derived clinical phenotypes of AN were identified, each characterized by a distinct symptomatic profile. Each phenotype was defined by specific combinations of core ED symptoms and general psychopathological manifestations.

BACKGROUND: Access to psychotherapeutic interventions and the standardization of psychotherapy training within psychiatric training worldwide remain a global challenge. In Russia, psychotherapy training has developed considerably since its introduction in the early 20th century. However, its integration into psychiatry training programs remains inconsistent, with variations across institutions.

AIM: To explore the experiences of psychiatry trainees and early career psychiatrists (ECPs) in Russia with psychotherapy education, and to assess their views on potential areas for improvement.

METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted using the World Psychotherapy Survey questionnaire, which was translated into Russian. The survey gathered data on psychotherapy training experiences, supervision, and demographic characteristics.

RESULTS: Data were obtained from 223 psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees across 38 Russian cities. There was a strong interest in psychotherapy training, with 88 (39.5%) participants already certified or undergoing training, while 100 (44.8%) planned future training. However, only 69 (30.9%) reported that their psychiatry training programs included mandatory psychotherapy courses. Supervision opportunities were limited, and many respondents funded the training themselves. The majority (n=200; 89.7%) supported the inclusion of psychotherapy training into the psychiatry training programs, with cognitive-behavioral therapy and psychodynamic therapy being the most preferred modalities.

CONCLUSION: Psychotherapy training is highly relevant to psychiatry trainees and ECPs in Russia, yet gaps in supervision and inconsistent integration into the psychiatry training programs need to be addressed. Revising educational programs to include mandatory psychotherapy training could align Russian psychiatric education with international standards and enhance the quality of mental health care.

BACKGROUND: Stress-induced mental disorders have been increasingly reported in young people worldwide. This trend highlights the need to assess stress levels in students and to identify resources to overcome stress. The role of conscious self-regulation in this process remains insufficiently studied.

AIM: To evaluate the role of conscious self-regulation in maintaining the psychological well-being of students in relation to acute, chronic, and perceived stress.

METHODS: Students from secondary vocational and higher education institutions participated in the survey. V.I. Morosanova’s Self-Regulation Profile Questionnaire, the Well-Being Manifestations Measurement Scale, the Acute and Chronic Stress questionnaire, and the Perceived Stress Scale questionnaire were used.

RESULTS: The sample comprised 2,189 students in 13 cities. The conscious self-regulation score was found to be negatively correlated with the scores for all types of stress (r ranged from −0.13 to −0.48, p≤0.001) and positively correlated with psychological well-being (r=0.55, p≤0.001). In a multivariate regression analysis, conscious self-regulation was associated with higher psychological well-being (β=0.26) after the model included indicators of acute, chronic, and perceived stress (β values ranged from −0.26 to −0.13).

CONCLUSION: Conscious self-regulation mitigates the negative impact of acute, chronic, and perceived stress on students’ psychological well-being.

BACKGROUND: Various methods of rehabilitation for patients with neglect syndrome have been developed in cognitive neuropsychology. In contrast, this issue has not been a central focus in Luria’s neuropsychological rehabilitation.

AIM: The aim of this study is to provide a comparative analysis of A.R. Luria’s methods for restoring higher mental functions (HMF) and existing approaches within the cognitive paradigm for rehabilitating patients with left-sided spatial neglect. These approaches will be evaluated based on concepts of “bottom-up” and “top-down” attention processes.

METHODS: The search for studies was conducted in the electronic databases PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and eLIBRARY.RU for the period from 1984 to 2024. Sources were included in the review if they contained information on techniques for overcoming left-sided visual neglect and assessing their effectiveness. The review considered publications across all study designs.

RESULTS: Based on an analysis of 56 publications, this study presents the first comparison between modern rehabilitation methods for left-sided neglect and A.R. Luria’s methods for restoring HMF. This synthesis has enabled a refinement of the existing taxonomy of methods for restoring HMF, leading to the proposal of a novel methodology, which focuses on “expanding/correcting the capabilities of the leading afferentation of the functional system (directed correction)”.

CONCLUSION: It is evident that the extant methodologies for addressing left-sided visual neglect are deficient in terms of efficacy. The most efficacious methods are those aimed at restructuring the functional system and based on arbitrariness and mediation, which largely correlates with “top-down” attention processes.

In the article “Duration Matters: Anticonvulsant Therapy Linked to Bone Loss in Interim Cross-Sectional Study” by Natalia Sivakova et al., published in Consortium PSYCHIATRICUM journal (Volume 6 Issue 2), errors were identified that require correction.

On page 10, in the RESULTS section, the tabular data was incorrectly presented as:

• The study included 100 adult patients with epilepsy aged 21–60 years (Me=29.0; interquartile range (IQR): 25.0; 43.3) instead of (Me=36.0; interquartile range (IQR): 29.0; 43.0);
• The control group included 58 somatically healthy volunteers aged 22–60 years (Me=29; IQR: 25; 43) instead of (Me=29.0; IQR: 25.0; 43.3).

The publisher has corrected the electronic version of the published article and updated it on the journal’s website (both PDF and HTML). The editorial team of the journal hopes that the mistakes could not significantly affect the perception and interpretation of the published work by readers, and should not become the reason for retraction. The editorial team and authors apologize to the readers for the mistakes made.