ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2026
Case report for an intervention for scientific pressure by brief strategic withdrawal.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and aims: With the increasing number of postgraduates being admitted, the scientific and academic pressure faced by this group is becoming more obvious, causing more concerns among people in tertiary education. This study is an exploratory, context-rich single-case report. This research aims at supplement the research deficiency in releasing pressure related to academic pressure. Based on Methods: A single-case pretest-posttest design was adopted. A 23-year-old unmarried female master's student in social science at the middle stage of her research project. She passed standardized screening procedures and satisfied all pre-set inclusion criteria. She was instructed to suspend stress-triggering behaviors such as thesis writing and literature searching. Quantitative data and qualitative materials were collected using the Research Anxiety Scale, the Challenge-Hindrance Research Stressors Scale, and diaries at three time points: before withdrawal (T1), after withdrawal (T2), and two weeks after withdrawal (T3). The withdrawal effects and their sustainability were comprehensively evaluated. Results: Brief strategic withdrawal intervention is correlated with decreased research anxiety levels supported by quantitative longitudinal data; it yields alleviating effects on hindrance research stress, yet produces no improvement in challenge research stress, and all these claims are backed by corresponding evidenced data. Conclusion: According to the research, brief strategic withdrawal is an accessible intervention that exerts beneficial effects on mitigating research anxiety and stress among postgraduates,. creating positive reference for developing strategic therapy. This study is limited by its single-participant sample and short follow-up duration, so caution should be exercised when generalizing the findings. Large-sample randomized controlled trials are needed in future research to clarify the universal effectiveness of this intervention.
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.