Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25810053›Full record

ArticleSchizophrenia bulletin2015

Integration and development in schizotypy research: an introduction to the special supplement.

Martin Debbané, Christine Mohr

Abstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in Schizophrenia bulletin, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
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.

Martin DebbanéThese authors contributed equally to this work. martin.debbane@unige.ch.
Christine MohrInstitute of Psychology, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland These authors contributed equally to this work.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In its fifth decade of existence, the construct of schizotypy is recapturing the early scientific interest it attracted when Paul E. Meehl (1920-2003), who coined the term, pioneered the field of schizotypy research. The International Lemanic Workshop on Schizotypy, hosted at the University of Geneva in December 2013, recently offered an opportunity to address some of the fundamental questions in contemporary schizotypy research and situate the construct in the greater scheme of future scientific projects on schizophrenia and psychological health research. What kind of knowledge has schizotypy research provided in furthering our understanding of schizophrenia? What types of questions can schizotypy research tackle, and which are the conceptual and methodological frameworks to address them? How will schizotypy research contribute to future scientific endeavors? The International Lemanic Workshop brought together leading experts in the field around the tasks of articulating the essential findings in schizotypy research, as well as providing some key insights and guidance to face scientific challenges of the future. The current supplement contains 8 position articles, 4 research articles, and 1 invited commentary that outline the state of the art in schizotypy research today.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchCongresses as TopicSchizotypal Personality DisorderHumans

Identifiers

PMID25810053
PMCPMC4373640

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.