Suicidal Risk in Adults in Panama: Validation of a Clinical Intervention Protocol
23 juillet 2026 mis à jour par: Vali Ruth Maduro Fernandez, Fundación Judío Panameña (JUPA)
This study aims to validate MBT as an effective and viable intervention for implementation in public health services, with the potential to directly impact suicide prevention policies in the region.
Aperçu de l'étude
Statut
Pas encore de recrutement
Les conditions
Intervention / Traitement
Description détaillée
Suicide is a critical public health problem that requires effective, evidence-based interventions. The investigators propose a pragmatic, multicenter, longitudinal, non-randomized clinical trial to compare the effectiveness of Mentalization-Based Treatment (MBT) versus Treatment Usual (TAU) in reducing suicidality in adults. Three hundred participants (18-60 years old) with suicidal ideation or active suicidal behavior will be recruited and assigned to one of three groups: (a) MBT in a private setting, (b) MBT in a public setting, or (c) TAU in a public setting. All participants will receive 12 psychotherapy sessions, one per week.
The primary outcome variable will be suicidality. Secondary outcome variables include depressive (PHQ-9) and anxious (GAD-7) symptoms, reflective function (RFQ), protective factors (RFL), and impulsivity (UPPS-P). Measurements will be taken at baseline (T0), session 6 (T1), final session (T2), and at 3 months of follow-up (T3). Psychotherapy process variables will also be assessed in all sessions: therapeutic alliance (SAI), psychological distress (CORE-10), affective regulation (DERS-8), and sense of belonging and burden (INQ).
The analysis, guided by the intention-to-treat principle, will employ Bayesian regression models to evaluate the superiority of MBT over TAU and the non-inferiority of public MBT compared to private MBT. Trajectories of change will be explored using Hidden Markov Models to model the process variables.
Type d'étude
Interventionnel
Inscription (Estimé)
300
Phase
- N'est pas applicable
Contacts et emplacements
Cette section fournit les coordonnées de ceux qui mènent l'étude et des informations sur le lieu où cette étude est menée.
Lieux d'étude
-
-
Provincia de Panamá
-
Panama City, Provincia de Panamá, Panama
- Consultorio Inter Cambio
-
Contact:
- Vali R Maduro Fernandez, Ph.D.
- Numéro de téléphone: +507 6568-8144
- E-mail: valimaduro@gateno.net
-
Chercheur principal:
- Vali R Maduro Fernandez, Ph.D.
-
Panama City, Provincia de Panamá, Panama
- Panama City Health Ministry Clinics
-
Contact:
- Roberto Gonzalez De La Lastra, M.D.
- Numéro de téléphone: +507 6070-7573
- E-mail: regonzalez@minsa.gob.pa
-
Chercheur principal:
- Roberto Gonzalez De La Lastra, M.D.
-
-
Critères de participation
Les chercheurs recherchent des personnes qui correspondent à une certaine description, appelée critères d'éligibilité. Certains exemples de ces critères sont l'état de santé général d'une personne ou des traitements antérieurs.
Critère d'éligibilité
Âges éligibles pour étudier
- Adulte
Accepte les volontaires sains
Non
La description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Age and consent
- Presence of suicidal ideation or active behavior in the last month, assessed using the C-SSRS (e.g., intentional ideation, plan, or preparatory behavior)
- Depressive or anxious symptoms (Score ≥ 10 on the PHQ-9, indicating at least moderate depressive symptoms, or Score ≥ 10 on the GAD-7, suggesting clinically significant anxiety.)
- Availability and commitment to participate in the full assessment using all the aforementioned scales.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Clinical Safety (exclude and refer immediately)
- Imminent suicide risk according to the C-SSRS (e.g., attempt within the last 7 days, current intentional plan, access to lethal means, and low ambivalence).
- PHQ-9 item 9 = 3 ("almost every day") with clinical corroboration of imminent risk.
- Current self-harm with lethality/high-harm moderator requiring acute restraint.
- Refusal to establish a safety plan or allow emergency contact.
- Acute Psychiatric Conditions/Contraindications of Assessment
- Active psychosis or unstabilized manic episode.
- Substance use disorder in intoxication or acute withdrawal (e.g., last 24-72 hours) that precludes valid assessment.
- Uncontrolled risk of severe other-directed violence.
- Medical or neurological conditions that preclude valid participation
- Severe cognitive impairment (e.g., dementia, recent moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury) that prevents understanding/answering scales.
- Decompensated medical illness (e.g., desaturation, delirium, severe uncontrolled pain).
- Unstable neurological condition (e.g., uncontrolled seizures).
- Methodological interferences
- Recent changes in baseline psychotropic medications within the last 2 weeks.
- Concurrent intensive psychotherapy initiated within the last 4 weeks.
- Simultaneous participation in another trial that could contaminate results.
- Language other than that of the scales without available validation.
- Logistical impossibility for follow-up (no telephone/stable contact; imminent relocation plan).
- Legal aspects/consent
- Incapacity to consent (legal or clinical) and no available representative.
- Legal restrictions that prevent participation.
Plan d'étude
Cette section fournit des détails sur le plan d'étude, y compris la façon dont l'étude est conçue et ce que l'étude mesure.
Comment l'étude est-elle conçue ?
Détails de conception
- Objectif principal: Traitement
- Répartition: Non randomisé
- Modèle interventionnel: Affectation parallèle
- Masquage: Aucun (étiquette ouverte)
Armes et Interventions
Groupe de participants / Bras |
Intervention / Traitement |
|---|---|
|
Expérimental: MBT_Private
100 eligible applicants selected from a pool of responders to an open call who will be administered the MBT intervention by private practice mental health proffesionals.
|
This is evidence-based psychotherapy that helps people improve their ability to mentalize: understanding their own and others' mental states, including thoughts, feelings, beliefs, and intentions, and connecting them to behavior.
MBT aims to improve self-reflection, emotional regulation, and the establishment of more stable and satisfying relationships, especially in people with borderline personality disorder (BPD) or complex trauma.
The treatment consists of individual therapy and prioritizes an inquisitive, rather than interpretive, stance on the part of the therapist to encourage the patient to develop their own understanding.
In the proposed study, a 12-session MBT protocol of 45-minute individual psychotherapy sessions will be used, with an intervention frequency of one session per week.
Autres noms:
|
|
Expérimental: MBT_Public
100 eligible applicants selected from a pool of responders to an open call who will be administered the MBT intervention by public mental health proffesionals.
|
This is evidence-based psychotherapy that helps people improve their ability to mentalize: understanding their own and others' mental states, including thoughts, feelings, beliefs, and intentions, and connecting them to behavior.
MBT aims to improve self-reflection, emotional regulation, and the establishment of more stable and satisfying relationships, especially in people with borderline personality disorder (BPD) or complex trauma.
The treatment consists of individual therapy and prioritizes an inquisitive, rather than interpretive, stance on the part of the therapist to encourage the patient to develop their own understanding.
In the proposed study, a 12-session MBT protocol of 45-minute individual psychotherapy sessions will be used, with an intervention frequency of one session per week.
Autres noms:
|
|
Comparateur actif: TAU
100 eligible applicants selected from a pool of responders to an open call who will be administered treatment as usual (TAU) by public mental health proffesionals.
|
Patients referred to participating Health Centers will receive Usual Treatment.
The investigators will adjust this treatment to match the dosage and frequency of administration to that of MBT.
The treatment will consist of 12 weekly sessions of 50 minutes each.
|
Que mesure l'étude ?
Principaux critères de jugement
Mesure des résultats |
Description de la mesure |
Délai |
|---|---|---|
|
Suicidality
Délai: Time Frame: The investigators will administer outcome measures on day one (baseline), at week 6 (midpoint), at week 12 (end of treatment), and in a follow-up interview three months after the end of treatment.
|
Suicidality will be measured using the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS).
The C-SSRS is a standardized and validated semi-structured clinical interview designed to accurately assess the presence, severity, and frequency of suicidal ideation and behavior.
It evaluates four constructs: the severity of suicidal ideation, the intensity of suicidal ideation, the occurrence of suicidal behavior, and the lethality of suicidal behavior.
|
Time Frame: The investigators will administer outcome measures on day one (baseline), at week 6 (midpoint), at week 12 (end of treatment), and in a follow-up interview three months after the end of treatment.
|
|
Depressive symptomatology
Délai: Time Frame: The investigators will administer outcome measures on day one (baseline), at week 6 (midpoint), at week 12 (end of treatment), and in a follow-up interview three months after the end of treatment.
|
Depressive symptomatology will be assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9, Kroenke, Spitzer & Williams, 2001).
The PHQ-9 is a nine-item self-report questionnaire that assesses the presence and severity of depressive symptoms over the past two weeks, based on DSM diagnostic criteria.
For each item, the person indicates how frequently they experience the indicated condition using a four-point Likert scale (0 = "Not at all" to 3 = "Almost every day").
The total score (range: 0-27) categorizes severity as: minimal (0-4), mild (5-9), moderate (10-14), moderately severe (15-19), and severe (20-27).
|
Time Frame: The investigators will administer outcome measures on day one (baseline), at week 6 (midpoint), at week 12 (end of treatment), and in a follow-up interview three months after the end of treatment.
|
|
Anxiety symptoms
Délai: Time Frame: The investigators will administer outcome measures on day one (baseline), at week 6 (midpoint), at week 12 (end of treatment), and in a follow-up interview three months after the end of treatment.
|
The Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7; Spitzer, Kroenke, Williams & Löwe, 2006) will be used.
The GAD-7 is a seven-item self-report questionnaire designed to assess the severity of generalized anxiety symptoms.
For each item, the person must indicate how frequently they experience the indicated condition using a four-point Likert scale (0 = "Not at all" to 3 = "Almost every day").
The total score (range: 0-21) categorizes the intensity of symptoms as minimal anxiety (0-4), mild (5-9), moderate (10-14), and severe (15-21).
|
Time Frame: The investigators will administer outcome measures on day one (baseline), at week 6 (midpoint), at week 12 (end of treatment), and in a follow-up interview three months after the end of treatment.
|
|
Reflective function
Délai: Time Frame: The investigators will administer outcome measures on day one (baseline), at week 6 (midpoint), at week 12 (end of treatment), and in a follow-up interview three months after the end of treatment.
|
The investigators will assess reflective function using the Reflective Functioning Questionnaire (RFQ; Fonagy et al., 2016).
The investigators will use the eight-item abbreviated version (RFQ-8), which assesses an individual's ability to understand their own and others' behavior in terms of underlying mental states.
Each item is rated by the participant on a seven-point Likert scale (1 = "Strongly disagree" to 7 = "Strongly agree").
The result includes two subscales that measure the degree of uncertainty (RFQ_U) and the degree of certainty (RFQ_C) about mental states.
It also yields an overall score, where high values indicate uncertainty about mental states (hypomentalization) and low values indicate genuine mentalization.
|
Time Frame: The investigators will administer outcome measures on day one (baseline), at week 6 (midpoint), at week 12 (end of treatment), and in a follow-up interview three months after the end of treatment.
|
|
Protective factors against suicide
Délai: Time Frame: The investigators will administer outcome measures on day one (baseline), at week 6 (midpoint), at week 12 (end of treatment), and in a follow-up interview three months after the end of treatment.
|
The investigators will assess factors that counteract suicidal vulnerability using the Reasons for Living Inventory (RFLI; Linehan et al., 1983).
The RFLI is a self-report questionnaire consisting of 48 items that assess the importance of various reasons a person may have for choosing to remain alive.
The items are organized into six subscales, including beliefs about coping; Concerns related to family responsibilities; concerns related to children; fear of suicide; fear of social disapproval and moral objections.
|
Time Frame: The investigators will administer outcome measures on day one (baseline), at week 6 (midpoint), at week 12 (end of treatment), and in a follow-up interview three months after the end of treatment.
|
|
Impulsive behavior
Délai: Time Frame: The investigators will administer outcome measures on day one (baseline), at week 6 (midpoint), at week 12 (end of treatment), and in a follow-up interview three months after the end of treatment.
|
The investigators will assess impulsive behavior using the Urgency, Premeditation, Perseverance, Sensation Seeking, and Positive Urgency Brief Impulsivity Scale (UPPS-P; (Cándido Ortiz et al., 2012)).
The UPPS-P is a self-report scale that assesses impulsivity as a multidimensional construct, including five dimensions: positive urgency, negative urgency, lack of premeditation, lack of perseverance, and sensation seeking.
The scale contains 20 items answered on a four-point Likert scale.
|
Time Frame: The investigators will administer outcome measures on day one (baseline), at week 6 (midpoint), at week 12 (end of treatment), and in a follow-up interview three months after the end of treatment.
|
Collaborateurs et enquêteurs
C'est ici que vous trouverez les personnes et les organisations impliquées dans cette étude.
Parrainer
Publications et liens utiles
La personne responsable de la saisie des informations sur l'étude fournit volontairement ces publications. Il peut s'agir de tout ce qui concerne l'étude.
Publications générales
- Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med. 2001 Sep;16(9):606-13. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.x.
- Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JB, Lowe B. A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7. Arch Intern Med. 2006 May 22;166(10):1092-7. doi: 10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092.
- Cyders MA, Littlefield AK, Coffey S, Karyadi KA. Examination of a short English version of the UPPS-P Impulsive Behavior Scale. Addict Behav. 2014 Sep;39(9):1372-6. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2014.02.013. Epub 2014 Mar 3.
- Lowe B, Unutzer J, Callahan CM, Perkins AJ, Kroenke K. Monitoring depression treatment outcomes with the patient health questionnaire-9. Med Care. 2004 Dec;42(12):1194-201. doi: 10.1097/00005650-200412000-00006.
- Kroenke K, Strine TW, Spitzer RL, Williams JB, Berry JT, Mokdad AH. The PHQ-8 as a measure of current depression in the general population. J Affect Disord. 2009 Apr;114(1-3):163-73. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2008.06.026. Epub 2008 Aug 27.
- Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JB. Validation and utility of a self-report version of PRIME-MD: the PHQ primary care study. Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders. Patient Health Questionnaire. JAMA. 1999 Nov 10;282(18):1737-44. doi: 10.1001/jama.282.18.1737.
- Spitzer RL, Williams JB, Kroenke K, Hornyak R, McMurray J. Validity and utility of the PRIME-MD patient health questionnaire in assessment of 3000 obstetric-gynecologic patients: the PRIME-MD Patient Health Questionnaire Obstetrics-Gynecology Study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000 Sep;183(3):759-69. doi: 10.1067/mob.2000.106580.
- Spitzer RL, Williams JB, Kroenke K, Linzer M, deGruy FV 3rd, Hahn SR, Brody D, Johnson JG. Utility of a new procedure for diagnosing mental disorders in primary care. The PRIME-MD 1000 study. JAMA. 1994 Dec 14;272(22):1749-56.
- Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. The Patient Health Questionnaire-2: validity of a two-item depression screener. Med Care. 2003 Nov;41(11):1284-92. doi: 10.1097/01.MLR.0000093487.78664.3C.
- Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB, Monahan PO, Lowe B. Anxiety disorders in primary care: prevalence, impairment, comorbidity, and detection. Ann Intern Med. 2007 Mar 6;146(5):317-25. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-146-5-200703060-00004.
- Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. The PHQ-15: validity of a new measure for evaluating the severity of somatic symptoms. Psychosom Med. 2002 Mar-Apr;64(2):258-66. doi: 10.1097/00006842-200203000-00008.
- Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB, Lowe B. The Patient Health Questionnaire Somatic, Anxiety, and Depressive Symptom Scales: a systematic review. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2010 Jul-Aug;32(4):345-59. doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2010.03.006. Epub 2010 May 7.
- Van Orden KA, Cukrowicz KC, Witte TK, Joiner TE. Thwarted belongingness and perceived burdensomeness: construct validity and psychometric properties of the Interpersonal Needs Questionnaire. Psychol Assess. 2012 Mar;24(1):197-215. doi: 10.1037/a0025358. Epub 2011 Sep 19.
- Fonagy P, Luyten P, Moulton-Perkins A, Lee YW, Warren F, Howard S, Ghinai R, Fearon P, Lowyck B. Development and Validation of a Self-Report Measure of Mentalizing: The Reflective Functioning Questionnaire. PLoS One. 2016 Jul 8;11(7):e0158678. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0158678. eCollection 2016.
- Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB, Lowe B. An ultra-brief screening scale for anxiety and depression: the PHQ-4. Psychosomatics. 2009 Nov-Dec;50(6):613-21. doi: 10.1176/appi.psy.50.6.613.
- Johnson JG, Harris ES, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. The patient health questionnaire for adolescents: validation of an instrument for the assessment of mental disorders among adolescent primary care patients. J Adolesc Health. 2002 Mar;30(3):196-204. doi: 10.1016/s1054-139x(01)00333-0.
- Rossouw TI, Fonagy P. Mentalization-based treatment for self-harm in adolescents: a randomized controlled trial. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2012 Dec;51(12):1304-1313.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.jaac.2012.09.018.
- Van Orden KA, Witte TK, Cukrowicz KC, Braithwaite SR, Selby EA, Joiner TE Jr. The interpersonal theory of suicide. Psychol Rev. 2010 Apr;117(2):575-600. doi: 10.1037/a0018697.
- Dube P, Kurt K, Bair MJ, Theobald D, Williams LS. The p4 screener: evaluation of a brief measure for assessing potential suicide risk in 2 randomized effectiveness trials of primary care and oncology patients. Prim Care Companion J Clin Psychiatry. 2010;12(6):PCC.10m00978. doi: 10.4088/PCC.10m00978blu.
- Verdejo-Garcia A, Lozano O, Moya M, Alcazar MA, Perez-Garcia M. Psychometric properties of a Spanish version of the UPPS-P impulsive behavior scale: reliability, validity and association with trait and cognitive impulsivity. J Pers Assess. 2010 Jan;92(1):70-7. doi: 10.1080/00223890903382369.
- Linehan MM, Goodstein JL, Nielsen SL, Chiles JA. Reasons for staying alive when you are thinking of killing yourself: the reasons for living inventory. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1983 Apr;51(2):276-86. doi: 10.1037//0022-006x.51.2.276. No abstract available.
- Ordóñez-Carrasco, J. L., et al. (2018). Propiedades psicométricas de la versión en español del Cuestionario de Necesidades Interpersonales en pacientes... Anales de Psicología, 34(2), 245-251.
- Silva C, Hurtado G, Hartley C, Rangel JN, Hovey JD, Pettit JW, Chorot P, Valiente RM, Sandin B, Joiner TE. Spanish translation and validation of the Interpersonal Needs Questionnaire. Psychol Assess. 2018 Oct;30(10):e21-e37. doi: 10.1037/pas0000643.
- Delaigue Baechler, S. (2017). Translation of the Working Alliance Inventory Short Revised (WAI-SR) from English into Spanish, using a forward backward translation and a Delphi consensus method. Life Sciences [q-bio]. ⟨dumas-01616390)
- Falkenstrom F, Hatcher RL, Skjulsvik T, Larsson MH, Holmqvist R. Development and validation of a 6-item working alliance questionnaire for repeated administrations during psychotherapy. Psychol Assess. 2015 Mar;27(1):169-83. doi: 10.1037/pas0000038. Epub 2014 Oct 27.
- Bordin, E. S. (1979). The generalizability of the psychoanalytic concept of the working alliance. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice, 16(3), 252-260.
- Whiteside, S. P., & Lynam, D. R. (2001). The Five Factor Model and impulsivity: Using a structural model of personality to understand impulsivity. Personality and Individual Differences, 30(4), 669-689. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00064-7
- NovoPsych. (n.d.). Short UPPS-P Impulsive Behavior Scale (S-UPPS-P). Retrieved from https://novopsych.com.au/assessments/formulation/short-upps-p-impulsive-behaviour-scale-s-upps-p/ (This is the psychological assessment platform mentioned in your text that hosts the test for clinical use.)
- Cyders MA, Smith GT, Spillane NS, Fischer S, Annus AM, Peterson C. Integration of impulsivity and positive mood to predict risky behavior: development and validation of a measure of positive urgency. Psychol Assess. 2007 Mar;19(1):107-18. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.19.1.107.
- García, J., Palacio, C. A., Vargas, G., & García, H. I. (2009). Validation of the Reasons to Live Inventory (RFL) in subjects with suicidal behavior in Colombia. Colombian Journal of Psychiatry, 38(1), 66-84. http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-74502009000100006
- Echávarri, O., Morales, S., Taylor, T., Barros, J., Maino, M., et al. (2018). Validation of the Reasons to Live Scale in mental health patients in the Metropolitan Region of Chile. Psychological Therapy, 36(2), 101-112. https://doi.org/10.4067/s0718-48082018000200101
- Lowe B, Spitzer RL, Williams JB, Mussell M, Schellberg D, Kroenke K. Depression, anxiety and somatization in primary care: syndrome overlap and functional impairment. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2008 May-Jun;30(3):191-9. doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2008.01.001.
- Kroenke K, Spitzer RL. The PHQ-9: a new depression diagnostic and severity measure. Psychiatric Annals 2002;32:509-521. [also includes validation data on PHQ-8]
- Xia, Y.-M., & Tang, N.-S. (2019). Bayesian analysis for mixture of latent variable hidden Markov models with multivariate longitudinal data. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 132, 190-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csda.2018.08.004
- Wenzel, A., & Beck, A. T. (2008). A cognitive model of suicidal behavior: Theory and treatment. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 32, 427-441.
- R Core Team (2025). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/.
- O'Connor RC, Nock MK. The psychology of suicidal behaviour. Lancet Psychiatry. 2014 Jun;1(1):73-85. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(14)70222-6. Epub 2014 Jun 4.
- McElreath, R. (2020). Statistical rethinking: A Bayesian course with examples in R and Stan (Second edition). Chapman & Hall/CRC.
- Lynch FL, Hornbrook M, Clarke GN, Perrin N, Polen MR, O'Connor E, Dickerson J. Cost-effectiveness of an intervention to prevent depression in at-risk teens. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005 Nov;62(11):1241-8. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.62.11.1241.
- Liverani S, Hastie DI, Azizi L, Papathomas M, Richardson S. PReMiuM: An R Package for Profile Regression Mixture Models Using Dirichlet Processes. J Stat Softw. 2015 Mar 20;64(7):1-30. doi: 10.18637/jss.v064.i07.
- Linehan, M. (1993). Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment of Borderline Personality Disorder. Guilford Press.
- Lachin JM. Statistical considerations in the intent-to-treat principle. Control Clin Trials. 2000 Jun;21(3):167-89. doi: 10.1016/s0197-2456(00)00046-5.
- Karterud S, Pedersen G, Engen M, Johansen MS, Johansson PN, Schluter C, Urnes O, Wilberg T, Bateman AW. The MBT Adherence and Competence Scale (MBT-ACS): development, structure and reliability. Psychother Res. 2013;23(6):705-17. doi: 10.1080/10503307.2012.708795. Epub 2012 Aug 24.
- Joiner, T. (2005). Why People Die by Suicide. Harvard University Press.
- Hervás, G., & Jódar, R. (2008). Adaptación al castellano de la Escala de Dificultades en la Regulación Emocional. Clínica y salud, 19(2), 139-156.
- Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Stern, H. S., Dunson, D. B., Vehtari, A., & Rubin, D. B. (2013). Bayesian data analysis, third edition (3rd ed). CRC Press.
- Gelman A. Scaling regression inputs by dividing by two standard deviations. Stat Med. 2008 Jul 10;27(15):2865-73. doi: 10.1002/sim.3107.
- Gabry, J., Češnovar, R., Johnson, A., & Bronder, S. (2025). cmdstanr: R Interface to 'CmdStan'. R package version 0.9.0, https://mc-stan.org/cmdstanr/.
- Fonagy P, Luyten P. A developmental, mentalization-based approach to the understanding and treatment of borderline personality disorder. Dev Psychopathol. 2009 Fall;21(4):1355-81. doi: 10.1017/S0954579409990198.
- Fonagy, P., Gergely, G., Jurist, E., & Target, M. (2002). Affect Regulation, Mentalization, and the Development of the Self. Other Press.
- Espirito-Santo H, Paraiso L, Andrade D, Daniel F, Grasina A, Lemos L, Simoes-Cunha L, Bjureberg J. Emotion dysregulation in older people: validity and reliability of an 8-item version of the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale. Aging Ment Health. 2024 Jan-Feb;28(2):360-368. doi: 10.1080/13607863.2023.2260329. Epub 2024 Jan 31.
- Cándido Ortiz, A., Orduña, E., Perales López, J. C., Verdejo García, A., & Billieux, J. (2012). Validation of a short Spanish version of the UPPS-P impulsive behaviour scale. Trastornos Adictivos: Organo Oficial de La Sociedad Española de Toxicomanías, 14(3), 73-78. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=6409859
- Bürkner, P. (2017). brms: An R Package for Bayesian Multilevel Models Using Stan. Journal of Statistical Software, 80(1), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v080.i01
- Borges G, Orozco R, Benjet C, Medina-Mora ME. [Suicide and suicidal behaviors in Mexico: Retrospective and current status]. Salud Publica Mex. 2010 Jul-Aug;52(4):292-304. Spanish.
- Bateman, A., & Fonagy, P. (2016). Mentalization-Based Treatment for Personality Disorders: A Practical Guide. Oxford University Press.
- Barkham, M., Bewick, B., Mullin, T., Gilbody, S., Connell, J., Cahill, J., Mellor-Clark, J., Richards, D., Unsworth, G. & Evans, C. (2012). The CORE-10: A short measure of psychological distress for routine use in the psychological therapies. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, 1-11. http://doi.org/10.1080/14733145.2012.729069.
Dates d'enregistrement des études
Ces dates suivent la progression des dossiers d'étude et des soumissions de résultats sommaires à ClinicalTrials.gov. Les dossiers d'étude et les résultats rapportés sont examinés par la Bibliothèque nationale de médecine (NLM) pour s'assurer qu'ils répondent à des normes de contrôle de qualité spécifiques avant d'être publiés sur le site Web public.
Dates principales de l'étude
Début de l'étude (Estimé)
1 novembre 2026
Achèvement primaire (Estimé)
1 mai 2028
Achèvement de l'étude (Estimé)
1 mai 2028
Dates d'inscription aux études
Première soumission
12 juillet 2026
Première soumission répondant aux critères de contrôle qualité
16 juillet 2026
Première publication (Réel)
21 juillet 2026
Mises à jour des dossiers d'étude
Dernière mise à jour publiée (Réel)
27 juillet 2026
Dernière mise à jour soumise répondant aux critères de contrôle qualité
23 juillet 2026
Dernière vérification
1 juillet 2026
Plus d'information
Termes liés à cette étude
Termes MeSH pertinents supplémentaires
Autres numéros d'identification d'étude
- JUPA-2026
- U1111-1342-5972 (Autre identifiant: World Health Organization (WHO))
Plan pour les données individuelles des participants (IPD)
Prévoyez-vous de partager les données individuelles des participants (DPI) ?
NON
Description du régime IPD
For confidentiality
Informations sur les médicaments et les dispositifs, documents d'étude
Étudie un produit pharmaceutique réglementé par la FDA américaine
Non
Étudie un produit d'appareil réglementé par la FDA américaine
Non
Ces informations ont été extraites directement du site Web clinicaltrials.gov sans aucune modification. Si vous avez des demandes de modification, de suppression ou de mise à jour des détails de votre étude, veuillez contacter register@clinicaltrials.gov. Dès qu'un changement est mis en œuvre sur clinicaltrials.gov, il sera également mis à jour automatiquement sur notre site Web .