Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39543824›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of methods in psychiatric research2024

Network analysis: An overview for mental health research.

Giovanni Briganti, Marco Scutari, Sacha Epskamp, Denny Borsboom, Ria H A Hoekstra, Hudson Fernandes Golino, Alexander P Christensen, Yannick Morvan, Omid V Ebrahimi, Giulio Costantini and 12 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of methods in psychiatric research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
70citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

22 authors.

Giovanni BrigantiUniversity of Mons, Mons, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-4038-3363
Marco ScutariIstituto Dalle Molle di Studi sull'Intelligenza Artificiale, Lugano, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-2151-7266
Sacha EpskampNational University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Denny BorsboomUniversity of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Ria H A HoekstraUniversity of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-2997-0556
Hudson Fernandes GolinoUniversity of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA.
Alexander P ChristensenVanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9798-7037
Yannick MorvanUniversité Paris Nanterre, Nanterre, France.ORCID 0000-0001-5980-4538
Omid V EbrahimiUniversity of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8335-2217
Giulio CostantiniUniversity of Milan-Bicocca, Milano, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-6610-5452
Alexandre HeerenUniversité Catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-0553-6149
Jill de RonUniversity of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7226-3836
Laura F BringmannUniversity of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8091-9935
Karoline HuthUniversity of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0662-1591
Jonas M B HaslbeckUniversity of Maastricht, Maastricht, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-9096-7837
Adela-Maria IsvoranuNational University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Maarten MarsmanUniversity of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Tessa BlankenUniversity of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-1731-0251
Allison GilbertUniversity of Mons, Mons, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-1492-7424
Teague Rhine HenryUniversity of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA.
Eiko I FriedLeiden University, Leiden, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7469-594X
Richard J McNallyHarvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Network approaches to psychopathology have become increasingly common in mental health research, with many theoretical and methodological developments quickly gaining traction. This article illustrates contemporary practices in applying network analytical tools, bridging the gap between network concepts and their empirical applications. We explain how we can use graphs to construct networks representing complex associations among observable psychological variables. We then discuss key network models, including dynamic networks, time-varying networks, network models derived from panel data, network intervention analysis, latent networks, and moderated models. In addition, we discuss Bayesian networks and their role in causal inference with a focus on cross-sectional data. After presenting the different methods, we discuss how network models and psychopathology theories can meaningfully inform each other. We conclude with a discussion that summarizes the insights each technique can provide in mental health research.

Indexed as

Mental DisordersBayes TheoremBiomedical ResearchHumansMental Healthnetwork analysisnetwork modelingnetwork psychometricsnetwork psychopathology

Identifiers

PMID39543824
PMCPMC11564129

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.