ArticleThe British journal of clinical psychology2026
Exploring the role of early maladaptive schemas and intolerance of uncertainty in generalized anxiety disorder.
Article in The British journal of clinical psychology, 2026. 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.
- Exploring the role of early maladaptive schemas and intolerance of uncertainty in generalized anxiety disorder.The British journal of clinical psychology · 2026Article
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
objectivesThe impact of developmental factors has not been addressed in cognitive models and gold standard treatment of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). The present study examined the relationship between adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), dysfunctional parental styles, intolerance of uncertainty (IoU) and early maladaptive schemas (EMS) with GAD symptomatology and diagnostic status. The relationship between these variables was compared between a low anxiety and clinical GAD group. We hypothesized that the low anxiety group would score significantly lower on these variables compared to the clinical GAD group.
methodsParticipants in the clinical GAD group (n = 38) were recruited via a clinical trial and screened for a primary diagnosis of GAD using the Diagnostic Interview for Anxiety, Mood and OCD and Related Neuropsychiatric Disorders (DIAMOND; Tolin et al., Assessment, 25, 2018, 3). Participants in the low anxiety group (n = 148) were undergraduate students scoring in the normal to mild range on the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS-21; Lovibond & Lovibond, Behav. Res. Ther., 33, 1995, 335) and within the normal range on the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7; Spitzer et al., Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7 (GAD-7). APA PsycTests, 2006).
resultsHierarchical regression analysis indicated that IoU and two EMS (vulnerability to harm; self-sacrifice) were significant predictors of GAD-7 scores. Logistic regression analysis similarly found IoU and the EMS of vulnerability to harm as the only significant predictor of GAD group membership. ACEs and dysfunctional parental styles were not significant predictors.
conclusionsThese findings support further investigation of IoU and EMSs in models of GAD and the utility of targeting these cognitive vulnerabilities in enhancing treatment.
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.