Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26551904›Full record

ArticleJournal of behavioral addictions2015

Commentary on: Are we overpathologizing everyday life? A tenable blueprint for behavioral addiction research. The diagnostic pitfalls of surveys: If you score positive on a test of addiction, you still have a good chance not to be addicted.

Aniko Maraz, Orsolya Király, Zsolt Demetrovics

Open access · goldAbstract readComment
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of behavioral addictions, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
22.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 80 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Gaming Disorder in Adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Absence of Objective Differences between Self-Identified Addicted and Healthy Smartphone Users?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Development of a short form of the compulsive internet use scale in Switzerland.International journal of methods in psychiatric research · 2019
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Aniko MarazDoctoral School of Psychology, Eötvös Loránd University , Budapest , Hungary.
Orsolya KirályInstitute of Psychology, Eötvös Loránd University , Budapest , Hungary.
Zsolt DemetrovicsInstitute of Psychology, Eötvös Loránd University , Budapest , Hungary.
Eötvös Loránd University · HU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsSurvey-based studies often fail to take into account the predictive value of a test, in other words, the probability of a person having (or not having) the disease when scoring positive (or negative) on the given screening test.

methodsWe re-visited the theory and basic calculations of diagnostic accuracy.

resultsIn general, the lower the prevalence the worse the predictive value is. When the disorder is relatively rare, a positive test finding is typically not useful in confirming its presence given the high proportion of false positive cases. For example, using the Compulsive Buying Scale (Faber & O'Guinn, 1992) three in four people classified as having compulsive buying disorder will in fact not have the disorder.

conclusionsScreening tests are limited to serve as an early detection "gate" and only clinical (interview-based) studies are suitable to claim that a certain behaviour is truly "pathological".

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalBehavior, AddictiveBehavioral ResearchHumansaccuracyassessmentbehavioural addictiondiagnosisnegative predictive valuepositive predictive valuesensitivityseverityspecificity

Identifiers

PMID26551904
PMCPMC4627675
OpenAlexW2400240013

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.