Trial reportScientific reports2023
Treatment-associated network dynamics in patients with globus sensations: a proof-of-concept study.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this proof-of-concept study, we used a systems perspective to conceptualize and investigate treatment-related dynamics (temporal and cross-sectional associations) of symptoms and elements related to the manifestation of a common functional somatic syndrome (FSS), Globus Sensations (GS). We analyzed data from 100 patients (M = 47.1 years, SD = 14.4 years; 64% female) with GS who received eight sessions of group psychotherapy in the context of a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Symptoms and elements were assessed after each treatment session. We applied a multilevel graphical vector-autoregression (ml GVAR) model approach resulting in three separate, complementary networks (temporal, contemporaneous, and between-subject) for an affective, cognitive, and behavioral dimension, respectively. GS were not temporally associated with any affective, cognitive, and behavioral elements. Temporally, catastrophizing cognitions predicted bodily weakness (r = 0.14, p < 0.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.04-0.23]) and GS predicted somatic distress (r = 0.18, p < 0.05, 95% CI [0.04-0.33]). Potential causal pathways between catastrophizing cognitions and bodily weakness as well as GS and somatic distress may reflect treatment-related temporal change processes in patients with GS. Our study illustrates how dynamic NA can be used in the context of outcome research.
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.