Cited by 70Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsCardiac Health and Mental Health

The association of perseverative negative thinking with depression, anxiety and emotional distress in people with long term conditions: a systematic review

Open access
Trick, Leanne, Watkins, Edward, Windeatt, Stacey, Dickens, Chris·2016·Journal of Psychosomatic Research

Abstract

Objective Depression is common in people with long term conditions, and is associated with worse medical outcomes. Previous research shows perseverative negative thinking (e.g. worry, rumination) predicts subsequent depression and worse medical outcomes, suggesting interventions targeting perseverative negative thinking could improve depression and medical outcomes. Previous studies recruited healthy individuals, however. This review aimed to determine the temporal relationship and strength of prospective association of perseverative negative thinking with depression, anxiety and emotional distress in people with long term conditions.Method Four electronic databases were searched for studies including standardised measures of perseverative negative thinking and depression, anxiety or emotional distress, and which presented prospective associations. Findings were narratively synthesized.Results Thirty studies were identified in a range of long term conditions. Perseverative negative thinking and subsequent depression, anxiety or emotional distress were significantly correlated in the majority of studies (bivariate r=0.23 to r=0.73). 25 studies controlled for confounders, and in 15 perseverative negative thinking predicted subsequent depression, anxiety or emotional distress. Results varied according to condition and study quality. Six of 7 studies found bivariate associations between depression, anxiety or emotional distress and subsequent perseverative negative thinking, though 2 studies controlling for key covariates found no association. Few studies assessed the impact of perseverative negative thinking on medical outcomes.Conclusion Strongest evidence supported perseverative negative thinking predicting subsequent depression, anxiety and emotional distress in people with long term conditions. Further prospective research is warranted to clarify the association of perseverative negative thinking with subsequent poor medical outcomes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2016.11.004

Cites

86 of 86 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Brooding rumination predicts subsequent depression in people with recent ACS.

    “Consistent with previous studies (e.g.Denton, Rieckmann, Davidson & Chaplin, 2012), our findings indicate that brooding rumination (the tendency for individuals to passively and abstractly make negative comparisons when feeling sad or down) predicts subsequent depression in people with recent ACS (Trick et al., 2016).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Lyubomirsky, S. and C. Tkach, The consequences of dysphoric rumination, in Depressive Rumination. 2008, John Wiley & Sons Ltd. p. 21-41.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Trick, L., Watkins, E., Windeatt, S., & Dickens, C.
Affiliations
University of Exeter (GB)
Corresponding author
Trick, Leanne
Venue
Journal of Psychosomatic Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-12
Volume
91
Pages
89-101
ISSN
0022-3999 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2551696677
Cited by
70
References
86
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 1
FWCI
0.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Psychosomatic Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Open Research Exeter (University of Exeter) (submittedVersion)
  • Durham Research Online (Durham University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health Research
  • Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust
  • University of Exeter Medical School PhD Studentship awarded
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Health and Mental Health
Keywords
rumination, worry, depression, anxiety, emotional distress, chronic disease, medical outcomes, prospective associations
MeSH terms
Pessimism, Adult, Anxiety, Chronic Disease, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Stereotyped Behavior, Stress, Psychological, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review