ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2026
The lifeworld of people who ruminate: a qualitative phenomenological study.
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.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ruminations are persistent, repetitive, and often distressing thoughts centered on negative events, mood states, and psychiatric symptoms. Recognized as a maladaptive cognitive process, ruminating contributes to the onset and persistence of psychiatric disorders and is strongly linked to negative emotional states, self-criticism, and suicidality. Despite its clinical significance, a comprehensive, phenomenological understanding of ruminations remains lacking. Objectives: This study aims to provide a detailed, descriptive account of ruminations from the perspective of lifeworld analysis, focusing on embodiment, space, time, emotions, social relationships, and values. The goal is to enhance clinical understanding of the lived experience of ruminating and generate hypotheses for future research. Methods: A qualitative phenomenological approach was employed, combining micro-phenomenological interviews and lifeworld analysis. Data were collected from 51 participants, including both normative and clinical samples. A total of 107 interviews were conducted, focusing on 79 experiential episodes. Results: Ruminating is an epistemic practice, driven by a need to resolve uncertainty and create meaning. Ruminations are triggered by a collapse of commonsense understanding, leading to intellectualization of daily life and detachment from intuitive or embodied responses. Ruminative episodes are characterized by feelings of paralysis, emptiness, and problematic relationships with knowledge. Conclusion: Rather than being a maladaptive pattern of thinking, ruminating appears to constitute a complex lifeworld. This observation calls for reconceptualization of ruminations from a unified symptom towards a system of interrelated and extended altered experiences.
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.