Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34444001›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Validity Evidence of the Multidimensional Emotional Disorders Inventory among Non-Clinical Spanish University Students.

Jorge Osma, Víctor Martínez-Loredo, Alba Quilez-Orden, Óscar Peris-Baquero, Carlos Suso-Ribera

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Multidimensional Emotional Disorder Inventory: reliability and validity in a Colombian non-clinical sample.Psicologia, reflexao e critica : revista semestral do Departamento de Psicologia da UFRGS · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors.

Jorge OsmaDepartamento de Psicología y Sociología, Universidad de Zaragoza, 44003 Teruel, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-7293-318X
Víctor Martínez-LoredoDepartamento de Psicología y Sociología, Universidad de Zaragoza, 44003 Teruel, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-0403-5273
Alba Quilez-OrdenDepartamento de Psicología y Sociología, Universidad de Zaragoza, 44003 Teruel, Spain.
Óscar Peris-BaqueroDepartamento de Psicología y Sociología, Universidad de Zaragoza, 44003 Teruel, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-2437-1207
Carlos Suso-RiberaDepartamento de Psicología Básica, Clínica y Psicobiología, Universitat Jaume I, 12071 Castellón de la Plana, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-2655-1017

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The current diagnostic systems for mental health disorders are categorical, which, it has been argued, poorly reflect the reality of mental health problems. This is especially relevant in emotional disorders (EDs), especially due to the existing comorbidity between supposedly different disorders. To address this, Brown and Barlow developed a hybrid dimensional-categorical approach to EDs that can be evaluated with the Multidimensional Emotional Disorder Inventory (MEDI), a transdiagnostic self-report questionnaire. This study aims to adapt and explore the sources of validity evidence of the MEDI in a non-clinical sample of Spanish university students (

Indexed as

Anxiety DisordersUniversitiesFemaleHumansMaleMood DisordersPersonality DisordersPersonality InventoryReproducibility of ResultsStudentsSurveys and Questionnairesassessmentdimensional psychopathologyemotional disorderssources of validity evidencetransdiagnosticuniversity students

Identifiers

PMID34444001
PMCPMC8392424

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.