Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38439797›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in psychiatry2024

State of the art of the literature on definitions of self-criticism: a meta-review.

Vittoria Zaccari, Francesco Mancini, Guyonne Rogier

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

3 authors.

Vittoria ZaccariSchool of Cognitive Psychotherapy, Rome, Italy.
Francesco ManciniSchool of Cognitive Psychotherapy, Rome, Italy.
Guyonne RogierDepartment of Educational Sciences, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Several authors have developed important theoretical models on an important transdiagnostic factor in psychopathology: self-criticism (SC). Currently, there are substantial variations in the theoretical definition of SC. The lack of awareness of similarities and differences between models may in turn impact the comparison between empirical results, limiting their clinical implications. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to identify current trends in the field of SC and to explore whether these were approached and shaped by different conceptualizations of SC. Methods: Core components of the most influential models of SC were identified. A meta-review was conducted searching for systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses in the following databases: PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed (all years up to 28 April 2023). Results: Contributions were heterogeneous with respect to the definition of SC and the theoretical framework. Almost all systematic reviews poorly addressed the multidimensionality of SC. In addition, discrepancies between the definitions of SC provided and their operationalizations emerged. Conclusions: The lack of dialogue between the different theoretical perspectives emerged from key contributions in the field of SC. Potential research questions to answer to stimulate this dialogue are proposed.

Indexed as

meta-reviewself-criticismtheoretical modelstheoretical perspectivestransdiagnostic factor

Identifiers

PMID38439797
PMCPMC10910096

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.