ReviewBiological psychiatry2026
A Framework for Advancing Mechanistic Neurobehavioral Biomarkers in Psychiatry.
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 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.
- The Potential of Cannabidiol for the Treatment of Psychosis: Endocannabinoid Regulation of Serotonergic Neurotransmission via Serotonin 5-HT1A/2A Receptors.Neurochemical research · 2026Review
- Flexible brain state engagement predicts cognitive control transdiagnostically.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Neuropsychiatry has yet to surmount the fundamental challenge of mapping behavioral pathology to its underlying neural pathology. This gap limits the development of treatments for specific circuit pathologies, despite the great potential of neuroimaging measures. We show that the field may be moving toward refining limited statistical frameworks, while clinically translatable solutions could emerge with broader considerations. We posit that the failure to operate within a formalism that defines falsifiable parameters might have hindered progress. Here, we propose a provisional formalism with the intention of bringing elements into focus that seem necessary to advance the development of precision treatments in psychiatry. Specifically, we propose that this formalism should consider 3 defining axes: 1) type of mechanism, 2) severity of mechanism, and 3) time. These 3 axes define a 3-dimensional dynamic mechanism complexity space (MCS). In turn, we posit that at any point in this MCS, there are embedded neurobehavioral subspaces or geometries for neural-to-symptom variation, which themselves are multidimensional and dynamic. This formalism provides for the mapping of the MCS to a neurobehavioral subspace. Furthermore, we articulate how this formalism accommodates integration of spectra from genetics and systems biology (transcriptomics, epigenomics, etc.) to neural mechanisms, symptom variance, and ultimately taxa of mental illness (i.e., categories). Finally, we argue that this formalism creates an opportunity to evaluate different types of treatment development that map onto dynamically evolving mechanisms of illness that are likely a hallmark feature of neuropsychiatric illness.
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.