Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27134650›Full record

ArticleEmotion review : journal of the International Society for Research on Emotion2016

Building a Definition of Irritability From Academic Definitions and Lay Descriptions.

Paula C Barata, Susan Holtzman, Shannon Cunningham, Brian P O'Connor, Donna E Stewart

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Emotion review : journal of the International Society for Research on Emotion, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Evidence Base Update on the Assessment of Irritability, Anger, and Aggression in Youth.Journal of clinical child and adolescent psychology : the official journal for the Society of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, American Psychological Association, Division 53
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

5 authors.

Paula C BarataDepartment of Psychology, University of Guelph, Canada.
Susan HoltzmanDepartment of Psychology, University of British Columbia, Canada.
Shannon CunninghamDepartment of Medicine, University of Alberta, Canada.
Brian P O'ConnorDepartment of Psychology, University of British Columbia, Canada.
Donna E StewartWomen's Health Program, Department of Psychiatry, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Canada.

Funding

CIHR 103251-1PHS HHS 103251-1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The current work builds a definition of irritability from both academic definitions and lay perspectives. In Study 1, a quantitative content analysis of academic definitions resulted in eight main content categories (i.e., behaviour, emotion or affect, cognition, physiological, qualifiers, irritant, stability or endurance, and other). In Study 2, a community sample of 39 adults participated in qualitative interviews. A deductive thematic analysis resulted in two main themes. The first main theme dealt with how participants positioned irritability in relation to other negative states. The second dealt with how participants constructed irritability as both a loss of control and as an experience that should be controlled. The discussion integrates the findings of both studies and provides a concise, but comprehensive definition.

Indexed as

affectdefinitioninterviewsirritabilityirritatedqualitative

Identifiers

PMID27134650
PMCPMC4848029

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.