ArticleBMC psychology2026
Network based associations between peer rejection and adolescent depression: evidence from general population and clinical samples.
Article in BMC psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPeer rejection is a significant risk factor for adolescent depression, but most studies have examined their associations treating them as unitary constructs. Considering their conceptional complexity, our study employs network analysis to examine the associations between different types of peer rejection and specific depressive symptoms at the dimension level and their changes from the general population to clinical samples.
methodsA total of 23,995 adolescents from general population (primary dataset, 11,577 males, age = 13.90 ± 2.19) were recruited through online advertisements. The network of peer rejection and depressive dimensions was first constructed in this sample, followed by comparisons across age- and sex-stratified subsamples. In addition, separate network analyses were performed in clinically depressed adolescents (n = 610, 155 males, age = 14.86 ± 1.96) and a subsample of high-risk adolescents from the general population (n = 7,523, 3,416 males, age = 14.53 ± 2.09), and subsequently a network comparison test was performed between them.
resultsThe edge between ignore and anhedonia exhibited the highest bridge expected influence in the primary dataset, the clinical depression and high-risk adolescent groups. Adolescents in different age and sex groups showed distinct patterns of specific edges within the dimension-level networks. Clinically depressed adolescents exhibited significantly stronger network connections than high-risk adolescents, particularly the edges between insult and interpersonal problems and between ignore and anhedonia.
conclusionsIgnore and anhedonia were crucial bridges connecting peer rejection to adolescent depression, and the connection was stronger in clinically depressed adolescents. These findings may provide a theoretical basis for guiding future research on interventions targeting peer relationships in adolescent depression.
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.