Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36213896›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2022

Accumulation of evidence during decision making in OCD patients.

Yilin Chen, Ying Liu, Zhen Wang, Tianming Yang, Qing Fan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Yilin ChenKey Laboratory of Primate Neurobiology, CAS Center for Excellence in Brain Science and Intelligence Technology, Institute of Neuroscience, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai, China.
Ying LiuShanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Zhen WangShanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Tianming YangKey Laboratory of Primate Neurobiology, CAS Center for Excellence in Brain Science and Intelligence Technology, Institute of Neuroscience, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai, China.
Qing FanShanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Decision-making often entails the accumulation of evidence. Previous studies suggested that people with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) process decision-making differently from healthy controls. Both their compulsive behavior and obsessive thoughts may influence the evidence accumulation process, yet the previous studies disagreed on the reason. To address this question, we employed a probabilistic reasoning task in which subjects made two alternative forced choices by viewing a series of visual stimuli. These stimuli carried probabilistic information toward the choices. While the OCD patients achieved similar accuracy to the control, they took longer time and accumulated more evidence, especially in difficult trials in which the evidence strength was low. We further modeled the subjects' decision making as a leaky drifting diffusion process toward two collapsing bounds. The control group showed a higher drifting rate than the OCD group, indicating that the OCD group was less sensitive to evidence. Together, these results demonstrated that the OCD patients were less efficient than the control at transforming sensory information into evidence. However, their evidence accumulation was comparable to the healthy control, and they compensated for their decision-making accuracy with longer reaction times.

Indexed as

decision-makingdrift diffusion modelevidence accumulationobsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD)probabilistic reasoning

Identifiers

PMID36213896
PMCPMC9539281

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.