Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35821866›Full record

ArticleClinical neuropsychiatry2022

Etiology of Psychiatric Disorders: Lay Beliefs and the Role of Gender, Field of Study and Personality Traits.

Alfonso Troisi, Giulia Dieguez

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical neuropsychiatry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. 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

2 authors.

Alfonso TroisiInternational Medical School, University of Rome Tor Vergata.
Giulia DieguezFacoltà di Medicina e Chirurgia, Università di Roma Tor Vergata.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the present study, we recruited a large sample (N = 595) of highly educated participants to assess which causal variables they considered as more important in the etiology of two diagnostically unlabeled cases of psychiatric disorders. The first clinical case described a patient with early schizophrenia whereas the second clinical case described a patient with conversion disorder. We aimed at ascertaining if participants' gender, field of study (scientific vs. humanistic), and personality traits influenced their causal beliefs. Based on the scores assigned to both the clinical cases, participants believed that current life stressors were the most important etiological variable and that adverse early experiences were not an important causal factor in anyone of the two clinical cases. Regardless of their field of study, women perceived the loss of a loved one as a relevant variable in the etiology of conversion disorder. Participants' beliefs about the etiology of early schizophrenia varied with their field of study. Compared to participants studying humanities, those studying scientific disciplines attributed more importance to organic causes and less importance to unconscious conflict and early traumatic experiences. Overall, the role of personality traits in influencing causal beliefs was negligible. Public education about the causes of psychopathology is necessary to optimize actual usage of mental health services and treatment choice for psychiatric disorders.

Indexed as

conversion disorderetiologyfield of studygenderlay beliefspersonality traitspsychopathologyschizophrenia

Identifiers

PMID35821866
PMCPMC9263677

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.