ArticleScientific reports2025
Response Inhibition in borderline personality disorder assessed with a gamified stop signal task.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Inhibitory control deficits in borderline personality disorder: a meta-analysis of stop-signal and Go/No-Go tasks.Psychological medicine · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is characterized by pervasive difficulties with self-image, interpersonal relationships, emotion regulation and impulse control. Impulsive behaviors can be assessed using tasks such as the stop-signal task (SST). Traditional SSTs are repetitive and cognitively demanding, requiring sustained attention and effort over extended periods. This can be challenging, particularly for clinical populations who often experience difficulties with attention, emotional regulation, and frustration tolerance. In this study, we examined whether a gamified version of the SST (gSST) could effectively differentiate inhibitory control in patients with BPD compared to healthy controls (HC), and explored associations between behavioral performance and self-reported impulsivity. Fifty participants (25 BPD, 25 HC) completed the gSST and the UPPS-P impulsivity questionnaire. Patients with BPD showed significantly faster reaction times, more choice errors, and shorter stop-signal delays, indicating impairments in proactive inhibition. Evidence for reactive inhibition deficits was, however, inconclusive, as no significant group difference emerged for the primary measure, the stop-signal reaction time (SSRT). The SSRT correlated positively with self-reported positive urgency across the sample, suggesting a link between emotionally driven impulsivity and inhibitory control as assessed with a gSST. These findings highlight the potential of gamified cognitive tasks to provide sensitive, engaging, and ecologically valid measures of impulsivity, with implications for both clinical assessment and personalized intervention strategies in BPD.
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.