Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37944560›Full record

ReviewPsychological reports2025

Symptom Network Analysis Tools for Applied Researchers With Cross-Sectional and Panel Data - A Brief Overview and Multiverse Analysis.

René Freichel

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Psychological reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

1 author.

René FreichelDepartment of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-9478-0575

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, there has been a growing interest in utilizing symptom-network models to study psychopathology and relevant risk factors, such as cognitive and physical health. Various methodological approaches can be employed by researchers analyzing cross-sectional and panel data (i.e., several time points over an extended period). This paper provides an overview of some commonly used analytical tools, including moderated network models, network comparison tests, cross-lagged network analysis, and panel graphical vector-autoregression (VAR) models. Using an easily accessible dataset (easySHARE), this study demonstrates the use of different analytical approaches when investigating (a) the association between mental health and cognitive functioning, and (b) the role of chronic disease in mediating or moderating this association. This multiverse analysis showcases both converging and diverging evidence from different analytical avenues. These findings underscore the importance of multiverse investigations to increase transparency and communicate the extent to which conclusions depend on analytical choices.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalChronic DiseaseCross-Sectional StudiesHumansmultiverse analysisnetwork analysispanel data modelspsychopathology

Identifiers

PMID37944560
PMCPMC12480605

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.