Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22124792›Full record

ReviewClinical child and family psychology review2012

Intimate relationships and psychopathology.

Mark A Whisman, Donald H Baucom

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical child and family psychology review, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 74 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
74citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
9.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

74 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 355 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Interpersonal Responses and Pain Management Within the US Military.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2016
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Relationship Stress and Suicidal Ideation: A Daily Diary Study.Journal of marital and family therapy · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

14 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mark A WhismanDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of Colorado Boulder, 345 UCB, Boulder, CO 80309-0345, USA. mark.whisman@colorado.edu
Donald H Baucom
University of Colorado Boulder · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Relationship functioning and individual mental health and well-being are strongly associated with one another. In this article, we first review the cross-sectional and longitudinal associations between relationship discord and various types of psychopathology, We then review findings suggesting that relationship discord is associated with poorer outcome for individual-based treatments for psychopathology and that, generally, relationship discord does not improve following individual-based treatments for psychopathology. Finally, we present a model for conceptualizing work with couples in which one partner has a psychiatric disorder and review the efficacy of couple-based interventions in the treatment for psychiatric disorders, with a focus on substance-related, mood, and anxiety disorders.

Indexed as

Interpersonal RelationsAdultChildCross-Sectional StudiesHumansLongitudinal StudiesMarital TherapyMarriageMental DisordersMental HealthParent-Child Relations

Identifiers

PMID22124792
OpenAlexW1997042090

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.