Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41717572›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2026

Development and validation of the Sensitivity to Intrusiveness Questionnaire.

Aviv Akerman-Nathan, Jonathan D Huppert, Eyal Kalanthroff

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Aviv Akerman-NathanDepartment of Psychology, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
Jonathan D HuppertDepartment of Psychology, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
Eyal KalanthroffDepartment of Psychology, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Intrusive thoughts are involuntary mental experiences associated with various psychopathologies and can be disruptive. Although most research on intrusive thoughts focuses on negative content, intrusive thoughts are not defined solely by what they contain. Recent findings suggest that the distress associated with intrusive thoughts is driven more by individual characteristics than by the content of the thoughts themselves. To capture such content-independent individual differences, the present research focuses on the development and validation of the Sensitivity to Intrusiveness Questionnaire (STIQ). Methods: Across four studies conducted in different countries ( Results: Results supported a stable three-factor structure of the STIQ, reflecting negative experience of thoughts, awareness and monitoring of thoughts, and perceived lack of control over thoughts. The questionnaire demonstrated high internal consistency and test-retest reliability and showed meaningful variance across personality traits and clinical groups, independent of intrusive thought content. Discussion: The findings highlight the utility of the STIQ in capturing a transdiagnostic, content-independent sensitivity to intrusiveness. The STIQ provides a novel tool for examining individual differences and the mechanisms underlying distress associated with intrusive cognitions, contributing to a more comprehensive understanding of intrusiveness in psychological phenomena.

Indexed as

cognitive consciousnessintrusivenessintrusive thoughtspsychometricstransdiagnostic questionnaire

Identifiers

PMID41717572
PMCPMC12914946

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.