ReviewJCPP advances2022
Underlying mechanisms of disruptive mood dysregulation disorder in children: A systematic review by means of research domain criteria.
Review in JCPP advances, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- An Expanded Conceptual Framework for Understanding Irritability in Childhood: The Role of Cognitive Control Processes.Clinical child and family psychology review · 2024Review
- Underlying mechanisms of disruptive mood dysregulation disorder in children: A systematic review by means of research domain criteria.JCPP advances · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A systematic overview of underlying mechanisms in the new disruptive mood dysregulation disorder (DMDD) diagnosis is needed. The Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) represent a system of six domains of human functioning, which aims to structure the understanding of the nature of mental illnesses. By means of the RDoC framework, the objective of this systematic review is to synthesize available data on children and youths <18 years suffering from DMDD as reported in peer reviewed papers. Methods: A literature search guided by PRISMA was conducted using Medline, PsychInfo, and Embase, while the RDoC domains were employed to systematize research findings. Risk of bias in the included studies was examined. Results: We identified 319 studies. After study selection, we included 29 studies. Twenty-one of these had findings relating to >1 RDoC domain. The risk of bias assessment shows limitations in the research foundation of current knowledge on mechanisms of DMDD. Discussion: Reviewing self-report, behavior and neurocircuit findings by means of RDoC domains, we suggest that DMDD youths have a negative interpretation bias in social processes and valence systems. In occurrence of a negative stimuli interpretation, aberrant cognitive processing may arise. However, current knowledge of DMDD is influenced by lack of sample diversity and open science practices. Conclusion: We found the six RDoC domains useful in structuring current evidence of the underlying mechanisms of DMDD. Important opportunities for future studies in this field of research are suggested. In clinical practice, this comprehensive summary on DMDD mechanisms can be used in psychoeducation and treatment plans.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.