ArticleBMC psychology2026
Considerations regarding article on parental psychological control, socially prescribed perfectionism, depression, and suicidal ideation among university students.
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
- Comment on
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Suicidal ideation (SI) and, by extension, suicide, represent a leading cause of death among university students. The study conducted by Wu et al. [1] addresses this crucial topic by identifying a significant partial chain mediation model linking parental psychological control (PPC) to SI via socially prescribed perfectionism (SPP) and depression. The article makes a genuine contribution to the understanding of mental health risks in a population facing markedly rising rates of psychopathology [2]. However, we address three concerns we believe affect the strength of the authors' conclusions: the use of causal language, certain measurement decisions, and analytic reporting choices. This commentary is intended as constructive and collaborative, towards further improving an already important contribution to the field.
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.