ArticleJournal of psychiatric research2026
Clinical patterns in a neuroimaging-based predictive model of self-reported dissociation.
Article in Journal of psychiatric research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Assessment of trauma-related dissociation has been historically challenging given its subjective nature and the lack of provider education around this topic. Recent work identified a promising neural biomarker of trauma-related dissociation, representing a significant step toward improved assessment and identification of dissociation. However, it is necessary to better understand clinical factors that may be associated with this biomarker. Participants were 65 women with histories of childhood maltreatment, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and varying levels of dissociation (e.g., co-occurring dissociative identity disorder, DID). Data were drawn from previously published work that identified a model predicting Multidimensional Inventory of Dissociation severe pathological dissociation scores on the basis of neural functional connectivity. Here, we conducted a k-means cluster analysis to explore model performance patterns in the original prediction model. We then investigated differences among the clusters in a range of clinically-relevant variables. Our clustering analysis identified four distinct groups. The original model best predicted those at the low (cluster 1, 82 % PTSD) and high (cluster 3, 86 % DID) ends of self-reported dissociation. Cluster 2 also largely included participants with DID (67 %), but the predictive model was less accurate for these individuals. Follow up analyses revealed that DID participants in cluster 2 reported lower levels of self-state intrusions, a type of DID-specific dissociation, compared to those in cluster 3. Thus, the identified model performance patterns suggest that the original prediction model may be linked to DID-specific dissociation. Our findings indicate that patterns of functional connectivity may be valuable to improve accurate assessment of DID.
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.