Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33115636›Full record

ReviewNeuroscience and biobehavioral reviews2021

Trans-diagnostic measurement of impulsivity and compulsivity: A review of self-report tools.

Roxanne W Hook, Jon E Grant, Konstantinos Ioannidis, Jeggan Tiego, Murat Yücel, Paul Wilkinson, Samuel R Chamberlain

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews, 2021. 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
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Prediction of Impulsive Aggression Based on Video Images.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Roxanne W HookDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, CB2 0SZ, United Kingdom. Electronic address: rwh29@medschl.cam.ac.uk.
Jon E GrantDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Chicago, Pritzker School of Medicine, USA.
Konstantinos IoannidisCambridge and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust and Department of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, UK.
Jeggan TiegoNeural Systems and Behaviour Lab, Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health and School of Psychological Sciences, Monash University, Australia.
Murat YücelBrainPark, Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, School of Psychological Sciences and Monash Biomedical Imaging Facility, Monash University, Australia.
Paul WilkinsonDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, CB2 0SZ, United Kingdom; Cambridge and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust and Department of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, UK.
Samuel R ChamberlainDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, CB2 0SZ, United Kingdom; Cambridge and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust and Department of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, UK.
Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust · GBMonash University · AUUniversity of Cambridge · GBUniversity of Chicago · US

Funding

Wellcome Trust 110049
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionImpulsivity and compulsivity are important constructs, relevant to understanding behaviour in the general population, as well as in particular mental disorders (e.g. attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder). The current paper provides a narrative review of self-report impulsivity and compulsivity scales.

methodsA literature search was conducted using the following terms: ("impulsivity" OR "compulsivity") AND ("self-report" OR "questionnaire" OR "psychometric" OR "scale").

results25 impulsive and 11 compulsive scales were identified, which varied considerably in psychometric properties, convenience, and validity. For impulsivity, the most commonly used scales were the BIS and the UPPS-P, whilst for compulsivity, the Padua Inventory was commonly used. The majority of compulsivity scales measured OCD symptoms (obsessions and compulsions) rather than being trans-diagnostic or specific to compulsivity (as opposed to obsessions). Scales capable of overcoming these limitations were highlighted. DISCUSSION: This review provides clarity regarding relative advantages and disadvantages of different scales relevant to the measurement of impulsivity and compulsivity in many contexts. Areas for further research and refinement are highlighted.

Indexed as

Impulsive BehaviorObsessive-Compulsive DisorderCompulsive BehaviorHumansPsychometricsSelf ReportCompulsivityImpulsivityPhenotypeQuestionnaireReviewSelf-reportTrans-diagnosticTransdiagnostic

Identifiers

PMID33115636
PMCPMC7116678
OpenAlexW3096437855

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.