ArticleJournal of behavioral medicine2026
An example of identifying conditional dependence in graphical models using Bayesian model averaging: general and disease specific anxiety in a cardiovascular patient sample.
Article in Journal of behavioral medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Data analysis for behavioral medicine: an introduction to the special issue.Journal of behavioral medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Parsing the interplay of psychological symptoms is difficult yet crucial for both disorder conceptualization and development of targeted interventions. This study used a Bayesian Model Averaging (BMA) approach to network analysis to identify the most probable structures and to evaluate conditional dependence underlying symptomology in 110 cardiovascular patients diagnosed with a Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm (TAA). Symptoms of general and disease-specific distress were assessed using the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS-21) and the Cardiac Anxiety Questionnaire-Attention Subscale (CAQ-A). Bayesian Model Averaging (BMA) and Bayes Factors (BF) were used to inform model selection and quantify model uncertainty. We present both the psychological symptom network with the highest posterior probability—and thus the best predictive utility and the BMA network, which produces tests of conditional dependence and independence which average over all structures and thus are not conditional on the other variables present in a single selected reference model. However, the posterior distribution showed variability in plausible complexity, or the number of parameters in the network structure. Utilizing BMA is especially protective in cases of structural uncertainty and high complexity. Of the 171 possible edges, 19 edges had strong evidence for inclusion. Notably, two edges connected the general and cardiac anxiety scales: DASS_7 (worry about experiencing panic) to CAQ_3 (chest discomfort wakes me up at night) and DASS_9 (Aware of Heart Symptoms) to CAQ_2 (racing heart wakes me up at night). This emphasizes the prevalent link between physiological components contributing to both general and cardiac anxiety. This approach highlights the utility of these methods in revealing selective and specific symptom interactions and offer a set of plausible causal associations, which could inform future studies (and Directed Acyclic Graphs) oriented towards testing causal mechanisms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41793624What 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.