Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31844706›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2019

Risky decision-making and delusion proneness: An initial examination.

Meisha Runyon, Melissa T Buelow

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Meisha RunyonThe Ohio State University Newark, 1179 University Drive, Newark, OH, 43055, USA.
Melissa T BuelowThe Ohio State University Newark, 1179 University Drive, Newark, OH, 43055, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Delusion proneness is an individual-differences characteristic, existing on a continuum from no delusional thoughts to a diagnosis of schizophrenia. Previous research found individuals high in delusion proneness request less information to make decisions, potentially making a decision without sufficient information (jumping to conclusions). The present study examined risky decision-making as a function of delusion proneness. Participants (

Indexed as

Delusion pronenessGame of dice taskIowa gambling taskJumping to conclusionsPsychologyRisky decision making

Identifiers

PMID31844706
PMCPMC6895726

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.