Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35815124›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2022

Mental health in a heterogeneous clinical sample. A cross-sectional study of predictors and gender differences.

Clara González-Sanguino, Berta Ausín, Miguel Ángel Castellanos, Manuel Muñoz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2022. 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

4 authors.

Clara González-SanguinoClinical Psychology Department, School of Education and Social Work, University of Valladolid, Extraordinary Chair Against Stigma UCM-Group 5, Spain.
Berta AusínClinical Psychology Department, School of Psychology, University Complutense of Madrid, Extraordinary Chair Against Stigma UCM-group 5, Spain.
Miguel Ángel CastellanosDepartment of Psychobiology and Methodology in Behavioral Science, School of Psychology, University Complutense of Madrid, Spain.
Manuel MuñozClinical Psychology Department, School of Psychology, University Complutense of Madrid, Extraordinary Chair Against Stigma UCM-group 5, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Women have been shown to be a vulnerable group in relation to mental health problems over time. Despite this, gender-focused studies are uncommon. The aim of this research is to study mental health in a sample of people with mental health problems and to analyze the differences and predictors focusing on gender. Methods: A cross-sectional study is conducted in a heterogeneous clinical sample in terms of mental health problems (N = 160). Interviews with hetero-reported standardized questionnaires to collect the data are conducted. Descriptive analyses, mean difference and a regression analysis on mental health are carried out taking into account different sociodemographic, clinical and psychosocial variables. Results: Women in the study present worse levels of mental health and subjective severity of the disorder. The main predictors of mental health are being female, followed by severity, shorter time with the diagnosis and internalized stigma. Conclusion: Being female is the most robust predictor of worse mental health and symptomatology. Recommendations according to the results found proposing a gender perspective are suggested.

Indexed as

GenderMental healthStigmaWomen

Identifiers

PMID35815124
PMCPMC9260627

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.