Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41938236›Full record

ArticleJAACAP open2026

Are Differences in Social Drive in Childhood and Adolescence Diagnosis Specific? A Multimeasurement Subtyping Approach.

Lacey Chetcuti, Antonio Hardan, Emily Spackman, Eva Loth, James C McPartland, Thomas W Frazier, Eric A Youngstrom, Robert F Krueger, Mirko Uljarević

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAACAP open, 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

9 authors.

Lacey ChetcutiStanford University, Stanford, California.
Antonio HardanStanford University, Stanford, California.
Emily SpackmanStanford University, Stanford, California.
Eva LothInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
James C McPartlandYale Child Study Center, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut.
Thomas W FrazierDepartment of Psychology, John Carroll University, University Heights, Ohio.
Eric A YoungstromUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Robert F KruegerUniversity of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Mirko UljarevićStanford University, Stanford, California.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Altered social drive is a common feature across psychiatric disorders and is embedded in multiple diagnostic criteria, underscoring the need for a transdiagnostic approach. However, the extent to which social drive alterations vary across diagnoses and clinical presentations remains poorly characterized. This study examined whether distinct social drive profiles-defined by differences in social reticence, seeking, and maintaining challenges-relate to variations in clinical features and show specificity to particular neurodevelopmental and neuropsychiatric conditions. Method: Data were drawn from the Healthy Brain Network (N = 2,380; ages 5-21 years, mean [SD] age = 10.27 [3.39] years; 68% male) and included youth with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, anxiety disorders, autism spectrum disorder, oppositional defiant/conduct disorder, depressive disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and tic disorders. Latent profile analysis identified distinct social drive profiles based on constellations of social reticence, seeking, and maintaining challenges. Profiles were compared across demographic, social functioning, and clinical measures, and the distribution of diagnostic categories within each profile was assessed. Results: Five profiles emerged: engaged (n = 1,530), inhibited (n = 477), aloof (n = 189), avoidant (n = 143), and constrained (n = 50). Profile differences were evident in demographic factors, social functioning, and clinical features. No single diagnosis mapped exclusively onto any profile; rather, participants with distinct neurodevelopmental or neuropsychiatric diagnoses were distributed across all 5 profiles. Conclusion: Psychiatric diagnoses alone may not fully capture alterations in social drive, which appear to transcend diagnostic boundaries. These findings support a transdiagnostic framework and challenge disorder-specific models of social drive differences.

Indexed as

diagnostic specificityheterogeneitysocial behaviorsocial engagementtransdiagnostic

Identifiers

PMID41938236
PMCPMC13043465

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.