Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29427197›Full record

ArticleSocial psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology2018

The network structure of paranoia in the general population.

Vaughan Bell, Ciarán O'Driscoll

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 90 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Epistemic Communities under Active Inference.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. The network structure of schizotypy in the general population.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2021
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Vaughan BellDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, 6th Floor, Maple House, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London, W1T 7NF, UK. Vaughan.Bell@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8616-4847
Ciarán O'DriscollDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, 6th Floor, Maple House, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London, W1T 7NF, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7316-3041
North East London NHS Foundation Trust · GBSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 200589/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeBebbington and colleagues' influential study on 'the structure of paranoia in the general population' used data from the British National Psychiatric Morbidity Survey and latent variable analysis methods. Network analysis is a relatively new approach in psychopathology research that considers mental disorders to be emergent phenomena from causal interactions among symptoms. This study re-analysed the British National Psychiatric Morbidity Survey data using network analysis to examine the network structure of paranoia in the general population.

methodsWe used a Graphical Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (glasso) method that estimated an optimal network structure based on the Extended Bayesian Information Criterion. Network sub-communities were identified by spinglass and EGA algorithms and centrality metrics were calculated per item and per sub-community.

resultsWe replicated Bebbington's four component structure of paranoia, identifying 'interpersonal sensitivities', 'mistrust', 'ideas of reference' and 'ideas of persecution' as sub-communities in the network. In line with previous experimental findings, worry was the most central item in the network. However, 'mistrust' and 'ideas of reference' were the most central sub-communities.

conclusionsRather than a strict hierarchy, we argue that the structure of paranoia is best thought of as a heterarchy, where the activation of high-centrality nodes and communities is most likely to lead to steady state paranoia. We also highlight the novel methodological approach used by this study: namely, using network analysis to re-examine a population structure of psychopathology previously identified by latent variable approaches.

Indexed as

Interpersonal RelationsAdolescentAdultAgedAlgorithmsAnxietyBayes TheoremFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedParanoid DisordersSurveys and QuestionnairesThinkingTrustUnited KingdomDelusionEpidemiologyNetworkPsychosisSchizophrenia

Identifiers

PMID29427197
PMCPMC6003969
OpenAlexW2786392325

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.