Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38740852›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Multiple paths to rumination within a network analytical framework.

Gerly Tamm, Ernst H W Koster, Kristof Hoorelbeke

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

3 authors.

Gerly TammPsychopathology and Affective Neuroscience Lab (PANlab), Department of Experimental Clinical and Health Psychology, Ghent University, Henri Dunantlaan 2, 9000, Gent, Belgium. gerly.tamm@ugent.be.
Ernst H W KosterPsychopathology and Affective Neuroscience Lab (PANlab), Department of Experimental Clinical and Health Psychology, Ghent University, Henri Dunantlaan 2, 9000, Gent, Belgium.
Kristof HoorelbekePsychopathology and Affective Neuroscience Lab (PANlab), Department of Experimental Clinical and Health Psychology, Ghent University, Henri Dunantlaan 2, 9000, Gent, Belgium.

Funding

Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek 12J9722N
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Theories of rumination have proposed different psychological factors to place one at risk for repetitive negative thinking. A comprehensive empirical test that captures the most relevant contributors to rumination is lacking. Building on influential self-regulatory and metacognitive frameworks, we modeled how key constructs in this context relate to ruminative thinking. 498 participants completed online questionnaires including indicators of rumination, metacognition, promotion goal orientation, effortful control, and depression. We estimated regularized partial correlation networks to investigate unique associations between the different constructs and followed these analyses up with directed acyclic graphs to identify potential pathways towards rumination. Results demonstrated that: (1) both self-regulatory and metacognitive factors were directly linked to rumination, amongst these were (2) positive beliefs, negative beliefs about uncontrollability and harm, cognitive self-consciousness, depression, effortful control, perfectionism, and (lack of) cognitive confidence, and (3) we identified multiple directed pathways, suggesting three direct contributors to rumination while controlling for the influence of all other variables: diminished effortful control, positive beliefs, and cognitive self-consciousness. This study is the first to comprehensively assess metacognitive and self-regulatory frameworks of rumination in a data-driven manner. Our findings suggest that there are multiple pathways towards rumination, which should be incorporated in clinical case conceptualization of rumination and related disorders.

Indexed as

MetacognitionRumination, CognitiveAdolescentAdultDepressionFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesThinkingYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID38740852
PMCPMC11091050

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.