ArticleEarly intervention in psychiatry2026
Jumping to Conclusions in First-Episode Psychosis and Bipolar Disorder.
Article in Early intervention 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimJumping to conclusions (JTC) bias, which is frequently observed in psychosis, is the tendency to make decisions based on inadequate information. This study explored JTC bias in individuals with first-episode bipolar disorder (FEBD, n = 52), first-episode psychosis (FEP, n = 61) and healthy controls (HCs, n = 38).
methodJTC bias was assessed using the Bead Task, in which participants were asked to draw as many beads as they wanted and make conclusions about their source.
resultThe results showed that both the FEBD and FEP groups exhibited a significantly longer response time and higher tendency to make decisions after drawing a single bead compared to HCs, indicating a subtle tendency towards hastier decision-making in these patient groups. No significant correlations were found between JTC bias and clinical measures. DISCUSSION: This study highlights that JTC bias is present in both FEP and FEBD, pointing to potential vulnerabilities in decision-making early in these disorders. These findings highlight the need for further research to determine whether addressing reasoning biases could ultimately benefit decision-making processes in these populations.
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.