ArticleCNS spectrums2025
Focused and automatic subtypes of skin picking disorder.
Article in CNS spectrums, 2025. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWhile prior studies have analyzed Skin Picking Disorder as a unitary condition, little research has been done examining clinical and neurocognitive characteristics of specific subtypes. The objective of this study is to analyze differences in impulsivity, emotional regulation, symptom severity, cognitive performance, and the presence of comorbid psychiatric conditions between focused and automatic subtypes of Skin Picking Disorder.
methods83 adults aged 18-65 with skin picking disorder were enrolled at the University of Chicago and separated into 4 skin picking subtype groups based on high or low levels of focused and automatic picking scores on the Milwaukee Inventory for the Dimension of Adult Skin Picking. The 4 subtype groups were separated using K-means clustering. Each group completed the same clinical and neurocognitive assessments. ANOVA or Chi-Squared tests were used to analyze differences in assessment outcomes.
resultsHigher focused picking scores were significantly associated with greater symptom severity and impairment. Differences in levels of automatic/focused picking were not associated with impulsivity, emotional/behavior regulations, or neurocognitive outcomes.
conclusionsThe findings suggest that focused skin pickers are likely to have more impairment due to their behavior compared to automatic or mixed pickers; however, overall, the groups did not differ in clinical or neurocognitive measures. Thus, it is unclear whether focused and automatic picking are particularly useful clinically in subtyping skin picking disorder.
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.