Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29106282›Full record

ArticleJournal of abnormal psychology2017

False alarm? A comprehensive reanalysis of "Evidence that psychopathology symptom networks have limited replicability" by Forbes, Wright, Markon, and Krueger (2017).

Denny Borsboom, Eiko I Fried, Sacha Epskamp, Lourens J Waldorp, Claudia D van Borkulo, Han L J van der Maas, Angélique O J Cramer

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of abnormal psychology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 80 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
80citing papers in PubMed
–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

80 citing papers in PubMed.

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

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Denny BorsboomDepartment of Psychology, University of Amsterdam.
Eiko I FriedDepartment of Psychology, University of Amsterdam.
Sacha EpskampDepartment of Psychology, University of Amsterdam.
Lourens J WaldorpDepartment of Psychology, University of Amsterdam.
Claudia D van BorkuloDepartment of Psychology, University of Amsterdam.
Han L J van der MaasDepartment of Psychology, University of Amsterdam.
Angélique O J CramerDepartment of Methodology and Statistics, Tilburg University.

Funding

European Research CouncilNetherlands Organisation for Scientific Research
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Forbes, Wright, Markon, and Krueger (2017) stated that "psychopathology networks have limited replicability" (p. 1011) and that "popular network analysis methods produce unreliable results" (p. 1011). These conclusions are based on an assessment of the replicability of four different network models for symptoms of major depression and generalized anxiety across two samples; in addition, Forbes et al. analyzed the stability of the network models within the samples using split-halves. Our reanalysis of the same data with the same methods led to results directly opposed to theirs: All network models replicated very well across the two data sets and across the split-halves. We trace the differences between Forbes et al.'s results and our own to the fact that they did not appear to accurately implement all network models and used debatable metrics to assess replicability. In particular, they deviated from existing estimation routines for relative importance networks, did not acknowledge the fact that the skip structure used in the interviews strongly distorted correlations between symptoms, and incorrectly assumed that network structures and metrics should be the same not only across the different samples but also across the different network models used. In addition to a comprehensive reanalysis of the data, we end with a discussion of best practices concerning future research into the replicability of psychometric networks. (PsycINFO Database Record

Indexed as

Models, PsychologicalAntisocial Personality DisorderAnxiety DisordersData Interpretation, StatisticalDepressive DisorderHumansReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID29106282

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.