ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
Emotional wellbeing in neurodivergent populations.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 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.
- Synthetic Emotions and the Illusion of Measurement: A Conceptual Review and Critique of Measurement Paradigms in Affective Science.Brain sciences · 2025Review
- Taming the flames: the role of emotional intelligence in controlling moral outrage among medical students.Frontiers in medicine · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Understanding emotional wellbeing in neurodivergent populations remains a critical yet underexplored area in psychological research. Methods: This study employs AgileBrain, a novel assessment rooted in a neuroscience-informed model of human motivation, to evaluate emotional activation, valence, and unmet emotional needs across a large and diverse sample of adults reporting diagnosed neurodivergent conditions. The sample includes individuals self-identifying with ADHD, ASD, DCD, SID, SH, OCD, and other conditions, alongside a neurotypical comparison group. Results: Findings reveal systematic variations in emotional wellbeing indexed by three key indicators: (1) overall valence (positive vs. negative emotional needs), (2) activation level (intensity of emotional needs), and (3) the resulting wellbeing index (a composite of the first two). Neurotypical respondents exhibited the highest wellbeing, characterized by low activation and positive valence. DCD and ASD groups showed moderate wellbeing with elevated activation, while groups identifying with SID, SH, and OCD exhibited increasingly negative need valence and a steep drop in overall wellbeing. Notably, the largest group-those reporting ADHD-showed moderate activation with a negative need profile, resulting in low overall wellbeing. A final group categorized as "other conditions" (e.g., depression, anxiety, bipolar disorder, PTSD) exhibited the most extreme negativity in need valence and the lowest wellbeing scores. Discussion: The study demonstrates the value of a needs-based framework for understanding emotional profiles in neurodivergent populations. By going beyond diagnostic labels to quantify emotional need dynamics, this approach offers scalable, quantitative insights into the lived experience of neurodivergent individuals and highlights distinct pathways to improving wellbeing. The results support the potential for targeted interventions grounded in emotional need fulfillment to enhance resilience and support across diverse neurodivergent profiles.
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.