ArticlePsychophysiology2016
Applying Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) to the study of fear and anxiety: A critical comment.
Article in Psychophysiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Putting the "mental" back in "mental disorders": a perspective from research on fear and anxiety.Molecular psychiatry · 2022Review
- Thigmotaxis in a virtual human open field test.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Towards a Clinically Valid Mechanistic Assessment of Exposure and Response Prevention: Preliminary Utility of an Exposure Learning Tool for Children with OCD.Journal of obsessive-compulsive and related disorders · 2020Article
- Modeling anxiety in healthy humans: a key intermediate bridge between basic and clinical sciences.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2019Review
- Dispositional negativity, cognition, and anxiety disorders: An integrative translational neuroscience framework.Progress in brain research · 2019Article
- The subjective experience of emotion: a fearful view.Current opinion in behavioral sciences · 2018Article
- From Affective Science to Psychiatric Disorder: Ontology as a Semantic Bridge.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2018Article
- An empirical review of potential mediators and mechanisms of prolonged exposure therapy.Clinical psychology review · 2017Review
- The research domain criteria framework in drug discovery for neuropsychiatric diseases: focus on negative valence.Brain and neuroscience advancesReview
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The goal of the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) is to develop an interdisciplinary science of psychopathology, forming a template for research and disconnecting conceptual and empirical questions from traditional diagnostic entities. In this article, we review some of the challenges in the implementation of this framework within the field of pathological fear and anxiety, specifically commenting on the article by Hamm and colleagues (2016). The study of pathological fear and anxiety has had considerable, yet stalled, success in its understanding of underlying mechanisms, prevention, and treatment. With a shift toward RDoC, it is unclear what to do with the existing diagnostic labels, and the importance of defining and measuring phenotypes becomes paramount. Additional concerns include the role of psychological constructs and mechanisms, the use of self-report measures, the examination of replication and clinical utility, and the measurement of the role of the environment. Though a laudable and potentially necessary shift in focus, it remains to be seen whether new overall insights into psychopathology will emerge from focusing on small units of analyses and piecing them together and whether these insights will directly translate into the prevention of psychopathology, more efficacious treatments, and improved lives of patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26877122What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.