ReviewThe Journal of nervous and mental disease2020
A Critical Review of Behavioral and Emotional Disinhibition.
Review in The Journal of nervous and mental disease, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Age-Associated Behavioral Alterations in Laboratory-Housed Octodon degus.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Modelling assessment of epidemiological strategies based on self-screening tools.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- Brain Tumors, AI and Psychiatry: Predicting Tumor-Associated Psychiatric Syndromes with Machine Learning and Biomarkers.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- The Importance of Including Psychophysiological Methods in Psychotherapy.Applied psychophysiology and biofeedback · 2025Review
- Clinical Manifestations and Neural Basis of Semantic Dementia: Converging Evidences From Brain Imaging Studies.Clinical interventions in aging · 2025Review
- The role of the endocannabinoid system in managing neuropsychiatric symptoms in Alzheimer's disease.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Review
- Acute ethanol disrupts conditioned inhibition in the male rat.Psychopharmacology · 2024Article
- The contribution of behavioral features to caregiver burden in FTLD spectrum disorders.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2022Article
- A transdiagnostic review of neuroimaging studies of apathy and disinhibition in dementia.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2022Review
- Proposed research criteria for prodromal behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2022Article
- What Do We Mean by Behavioral Disinhibition in Frontotemporal Dementia?Frontiers in neurology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The theory of "disinhibition" has been very influential in psychiatry and neurology for over a century. Disinhibition has been used to explain clinical findings in many neurological and psychiatric disorders including dementia, traumatic brain injury, attention deficit hyperactive disorder, substance abuse, impulsivity in personality disorders, and neurodevelopmental disorders. In addition, disinhibition has been used as a unifying theory to link clinical observations with cognitive findings, and even cellular findings. This review discusses the origins and history of the theory of disinhibition and its strengths and weaknesses in four domains: face validity, consistency with other brain mechanisms, consistency with evolutionary mechanisms, and empiric support. I assert that the vagueness of the theory, inconsistency with other brain mechanisms, and lack of empiric support limit the usefulness of this theory. Alternative approaches, based on findings in other motor, language, and cognitive functions, are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.