Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41725699›Full record

ArticleClinical psychology in Europe2025

Transdiagnostic Network Mapping of Psychopathology in Daily Life: Rationale and Research Protocol.

Guðrún R Guðmundsdóttir, Anne Roefs, Alberto Jover Martínez, Anita Jansen, Eiko I Fried, Esmée Groot, Lotte H J M Lemmens

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical psychology in Europe, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

7 authors.

Guðrún R GuðmundsdóttirDepartment of Clinical Psychological Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0912-6414
Anne RoefsDepartment of Clinical Psychological Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9935-1075
Alberto Jover MartínezDepartment of Clinical Psychological Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-9653-9050
Anita JansenDepartment of Clinical Psychological Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5101-8778
Eiko I FriedDepartment of Clinical Psychology, Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7469-594X
Esmée GrootDepartment of Clinical Psychological Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-0518-9415
Lotte H J M LemmensDepartment of Clinical Psychological Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2037-1808

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The burden of mental health problems and the need for more effective interventions is well established. One path towards treatment improvement involves more effective (evidence-based) tailoring, which requires a deeper understanding of differences in individual profiles of psychopathology. The network approach to mental disorders has emerged as a promising framework in this regard, as it sees and assesses psychopathology as individual networks of interacting symptoms and other variables and uses analysis methods that allow fine-grained analyses of (differences in) individual processes. Method: We describe the protocol of a 6-week ecological momentary assessment (EMA) study in a broad clinical population, designed to capture various transdiagnostic psychopathology relevant states. Participants are Dutch adults (desired = 600) who are currently awaiting intake- or start of treatment for psychopathology. In addition to EMA self-reports, we collect digital phenotyping data, a broad range of baseline data on symptomatology and transdiagnostic traits, and diagnostic classifications after intake. The study's primary aims are to estimate individual- and group networks of psychopathology (identifying), explore what factors can explain individual differences in networks (linking), and identify potential subgroups based on the networks (clustering). Finally, we plan to evaluate the measures and procedures to facilitate future transdiagnostic EMA (network) research. Discussion: The prospective study findings have the potential to advance the description, prediction, and assessment of psychopathology and to evaluate the utility of the network framework in achieving these aims. The insights gained may facilitate the evaluation and refinement of current classifications of mental health conditions and alternative transdiagnostic approaches.

Indexed as

diagnostic classificationsecological momentary assessmentindividual differencesmental disordersnetwork approachtransdiagnostic

Identifiers

PMID41725699
PMCPMC12923193

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.