ArticleJournal of psychopathology and clinical science2024
Are central eating disorder network symptoms sensitive to item selection and sample? Implications for conceptualization of eating disorder psychopathology from a network perspective.
Article in Journal of psychopathology and clinical science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Phenotypes of Anorexia Nervosa: Mathematical Models Based on Latent Class Analysis of Psychopathological Symptoms.Consortium psychiatricum · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Item selection is a critical decision in modeling psychological networks. The current preregistered two-study research used random selections of 1,000 symptom networks to examine which eating disorder (ED) and co-occurring symptoms are most central in longitudinal networks among individuals with EDs (N = 71, total observations = 6,060) and tested whether centrality changed based on which items were included in the network. Participants completed 2 weeks of ecological momentary assessment (five surveys/day). In Study 1, we obtained initial strength centrality values by estimating an a priori network using eight items with the highest means. We then estimated 1,000 networks and their centrality from a random selection of unique eight-item symptom combinations. We compared the strength centrality from the a priori network to the distribution of strength centrality estimates from the random-item networks. In Study 2, we repeated this procedure in an independent longitudinal dataset (N = 41, total observations = 4,575) to determine if our results generalized across samples. Shame, guilt, worry, and fear of losing control were consistently central across networks, regardless of items included in the network or sample. Results suggest that these symptoms may be important to the structure of ED psychopathology and have implications for how we understand the structure of ED psychopathology. Existing methods for item inclusion in psychological networks may distort the structure of ED symptom networks by either under- or overestimating strength centrality, or by omitting consistently central symptoms that are nontraditional ED symptoms. Future research should consider including these symptoms in models of ED psychopathology. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
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.