Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34557072›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2021

How Negative Is Negative Information.

Elisabeth Simoes, Alexander N Sokolov, Markus Hahn, Andreas J Fallgatter, Sara Y Brucker, Diethelm Wallwiener, Marina A Pavlova

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Elisabeth SimoesDepartment of Women's Health, University Hospital, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Alexander N SokolovDepartment of Women's Health, University Hospital, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Markus HahnDepartment of Women's Health, University Hospital, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Andreas J FallgatterDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Medical School and University Hospital, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen and Tübingen Center for Mental Health (TüCMH), Tübingen, Germany.
Sara Y BruckerDepartment of Women's Health, University Hospital, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Diethelm WallwienerDepartment of Women's Health, University Hospital, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Marina A PavlovaDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Medical School and University Hospital, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen and Tübingen Center for Mental Health (TüCMH), Tübingen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Daily, we face a plenty of negative information that can profoundly affect our perception and behavior. During devastating events such as the current COVID-19 pandemic, negative messages may hinder reasoning at individual level and social decisions in the society at large. These effects vary across genders in neurotypical populations (being more evident in women) and may be even more pronounced in individuals with neuropsychiatric disorders such as depression. Here, we examine how negative information impacts reasoning on a social perception task in females with breast cancer, a life-threatening disease. Two groups of patients and two groups of matched controls (

Indexed as

breast cancerdepression and anxietydevastating eventsgender impactnegative informationneural networkssocial cognitionsocial reasoning

Identifiers

PMID34557072
PMCPMC8452949

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.