ReviewBiological psychiatry2026
Hierarchical Phenotyping of Psychopathology: Implications and Opportunities for Precision Psychiatry When Biology Could Be Associated With Both Symptoms and Syndromes.
Review in Biological psychiatry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Using the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) for precision psychiatry.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2026Article
- Developmental coupling between obsessive-compulsive symptoms and psychotic-like experiences in youth: a four-wave longitudinal study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
As psychiatry increasingly embraces precision medicine principles, there have been efforts to characterize the specificity of biology-psychopathology associations (e.g., is biology associated with syndromes or symptoms?). Unfortunately, the vast majority of research is designed to test syndromes (e.g., case-control, symptom total/average scores) or individual symptoms a priori based on untested assumptions. Alternatively, most studies that attempt to empirically compare these options test biology as a predictor of 1) syndromes and 2) symptoms in separate models that are unable to directly falsify the specificity of observed associations because these options are not directly competing for the same variance. In this review, we will 1) discuss the historical tension between symptom- and syndrome-focused psychiatry; 2) introduce hierarchical phenotyping as an approach to determining the specificity of biology-psychopathology associations; 3) highlight how hierarchical phenotyping approaches are complementary to leading nosological movements in psychopathology research; 4) illustrate how a hierarchical phenotyping lens can generate promising future directions for precision psychiatry using immunopsychiatric, genetic, and neurophysiological examples; 5) highlight clinical implications of hierarchical phenotyping approaches to psychiatry; 6) discuss methodological implications of hierarchical phenotyping for best practices in measuring and modeling psychopathology; and 7) introduce methodological resources for readers interested in investigating hierarchical phenotyping in their own work. In doing so, we seek to build the case for hierarchical phenotyping approaches while simultaneously preparing motivated readers to use these methods in their own work to advance precision psychopathology research.
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.