SynthesisFrontiers in psychiatry2025
Exploring intergenerational links and genetic correlates of metacognitive beliefs: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in psychiatry, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Metacognitive beliefs, as proposed in the Self-Regulatory Executive Function (S-REF) model, are considered to play a central role in the development and maintenance of psychological disorders; however the intergenerational dimension of these beliefs remains poorly understood. Existing studies suggest potential associations between parental and offspring metacognitive beliefs, while preliminary genetic evidence indicates that some domains may be more strongly influenced by biological predispositions. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, EBSCOhost, and SCOPUS was conducted between January and April 2025, examining studies assessing the association between parental and offspring metacognitive beliefs, as described in the S-REF model, and studies exploring links with genotype. Effect sizes were pooled for domains assessed in at least three studies, and moderator analyses considered age, study quality, and the number of covariates included. Results: Nine studies met inclusion criteria, eight focusing on parent-child associations and one on genotype. Meta-analytic results indicated small-to-moderate associations for positive metacognitive beliefs (r = .24) and negative beliefs about danger and uncontrollability of thoughts (r = .17), whereas Cognitive self consciousness did not show significant associations. Limited molecular genetic evidence suggested that Cognitive confidence and Need to control thoughts may be more strongly linked to biological predisposition. Heterogeneity was observed across studies, and moderator analyses did not reveal significant effects. Conclusion: The intergenerational dimension of metacognitive beliefs is an underexplored area with heterogeneous findings. Associations between parental and offspring beliefs are evident, particularly for Positive and Negative metacognitive beliefs, while some domains may reflect biological influences. Future research should employ longitudinal designs, comprehensive assessment across all metacognitive domains, and integrate both genetic and environmental factors to clarify the mechanisms underlying these associations. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD420251020891.
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.