A real-time examination and comparison of differentiation among suicidal thinking and affect items in an adolescent sample.

Elizabeth A Edershile, Kinjal K Patel, Annabelle M Mournet, Richard T Liu, Catherine R Glenn, Evan M Kleiman

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Psychological assessment, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Elizabeth A EdershileDepartment of Psychology, Rutgers University.ORCID 0000-0001-9511-2387

Kinjal K PatelDepartment of Psychology, Old Dominion University.

Annabelle M MournetDepartment of Psychology, Rutgers University.

Richard T LiuDepartment of Psychiatry, Massachussetts General Hospital.

Catherine R GlennDepartment of Psychology, Old Dominion University.

Evan M KleimanDepartment of Psychology, Rutgers University.

Funding

Clarifying proximal mechanisms linking interpersonal stressors to suicidal behavior in youth: A multi-informant real-time monitoring studyR01MH124899 · NIMH · RUTGERS, THE STATE UNIV OF N.J. · PI GLENN, CATHERINE ROSE, KLEIMAN, EVAN · 2021 to 2025

$2.9M

National Institutes of Health; National Institute of Mental HealthNIMH NIH HHS R01 MH124899

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Suicide risk assessments require individuals to differentiate among types of suicidal thoughts (e.g., passive vs. active); yet most research relies on aggregate metrics that obscure this differentiation. Indeed, more severe forms of suicidal thinking are thought to involve the simultaneous experience of multiple forms of thoughts at high intensities. The present study draws on concepts from the affect differentiation literature to (a) examine different ways to operationalize differentiation in suicidal thinking and (b) compare differentiation in suicidal thinking with differentiation in affect. Adolescents (

Identifiers

PMID42475029

DOI10.1037/pas0001489

PMCPMC13390774

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata

LicenceTDM

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.