ArticleJournal of affective disorders2025
Dimensional foundations toward a novel nosology addressing comorbidity: Preadolescent syndrome profiles.
Article in Journal of affective disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTraditional categorical systems for diagnosing psychopathological symptoms, such as the DSM-5, face limitations including high comorbidity rates and insufficient support for transdiagnostic treatment protocols. Dimensional, person-centered approaches can address these limitations by focusing on cross-cutting psychiatric symptoms.
methodThis study leverages data from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development℠ Study (ABCD Study®) to develop dimensional models of preadolescent psychopathology, focusing on a large, diverse sample of youths aged 9-10. We used latent profile analysis (LPA) on Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) syndrome scales collected from an elevated symptomatology subsample to delineate subgroups for targeted interventions.
resultsFour distinct profiles emerged: "Mildly Elevated" and "Highly Elevated" (on both internalizing and externalizing), "Moderately Elevated - Rule-Breaking," and "Moderately Elevated - Internalizing & Thought Problems." These profiles differed significantly across sociodemographic, neurocognitive, and life experience characteristics. The "Highly Elevated" group showed the highest levels of risk, including greater trauma exposure and higher rates of parental psychopathology. In contrast, the "Mildly Elevated" group demonstrated lower levels of risk factors and higher fluid intelligence compared to the other groups. The two Moderately Elevated profiles were largely similar across most risk indicators, though the Internalizing & Thought Problems group had a slightly higher proportion of parents with a college education.
conclusionsThese profiles offer the beginnings of a foundation for classifying symptom co-occurrence and highlight the need for developmentally specific nosologies to improve risk detection and intervention strategies. Future research should further validate these profiles and explore their stability across developmental stages to inform targeted interventions.
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.