ReviewPsychology research and behavior management2025
The Etiology, Assessment and Treatment of Compulsive Checking: A Review.
Review in Psychology research and behavior management, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Checking is the most reported compulsion of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD), impacting 80% of individuals with the psychiatric condition. In this narrative review, we describe the theoretical conceptualization and empirical research of compulsive checking to highlight advancements and limitations in our current understanding of OCD. In terms of etiology, research shows that anxiety, uncertainty and inflated responsibility elicit checking, which in turn negatively impact memory confidence and higher-level cognitive functions. In addition, compulsive checking is linked to altered neural activities in the brain's subcortical regions. Although these studies have their methodological limitations, they collectively highlight the behavioral, cognitive and neurobiological underpinnings of OCD. In terms of assessment of compulsions such as checking, there is a suite of empirically validated tools that range from standardized diagnostic interviews to self-report measures. Recent innovations also include experimental and technology-assisted assessment tools. Finally, in terms of treatment, Exposure and Response Prevention (ERP) is the most empirically supported intervention for OCD that is supported by habituation and inhibitory learning models. There is preliminary support for cognitive therapy to target specific symptoms such as compulsive checking. However, more rigorous testing is warranted to determine its efficacy and mechanism of change.
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.