Cited by 250Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 199 of the 199 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 15 of the 220 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Toward a neurocircuit-based taxonomy to guide treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder

Open access
Shephard, Elizabeth, Stern, Emily R., van den Heuvel, Odile A., Costa, Daniel L. C., Batistuzzo, Marcelo C., Godoy, Priscilla B. G., Lopes, Antonio C., Brunoni, Andre R., Hoexter, Marcelo Q., Shavitt, Roseli G., Reddy, Y. C. Janardhan, Lochner, Christine, Stein, Dan J., Simpson, H. Blair, Miguel, Euripedes C.·2021·Molecular Psychiatry

Abstract

An important challenge in mental health research is to translate findings from cognitive neuroscience and neuroimaging research into effective treatments that target the neurobiological alterations involved in psychiatric symptoms. To address this challenge, in this review we propose a heuristic neurocircuit-based taxonomy to guide the treatment of obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD). We do this by integrating information from several sources. First, we provide case vignettes in which patients with OCD describe their symptoms and discuss different clinical profiles in the phenotypic expression of the condition. Second, we link variations in these clinical profiles to underlying neurocircuit dysfunctions, drawing on findings from neuropsychological and neuroimaging studies in OCD. Third, we consider behavioral, pharmacological, and neuromodulatory treatments that could target those specific neurocircuit dysfunctions. Finally, we suggest methods of testing this neurocircuit-based taxonomy as well as important limitations to this approach that should be considered in future research.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41380-020-01007-8

Cites

199 of 199 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

120 Not checked yet · 31 Own interpretation · 7 Partly supported · 2 Supported · 1 Supported so far · 1 No basis given · accuracy not yet measured

Verify all 205 references — free account

Show all 105 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 50
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 11
57 of 57
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    No published work has incorporated patients' subjective reports of their symptoms or considered specific treatment strategies directed at a range of clinical profiles and neurocircuit alterations.

    “To our knowledge, no published work has incorporated patients’ subjective reports of their experiences of symptoms or considered specific treatment strategies directed at a range of clinical profiles and neurocircuit alterations.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    There is no direct evidence linking sensory phenomena and habit formation to each other.

    “It is important to note that while sensory phenomena and habit formation are linked to similar circuitry, there is no direct evidence linking these features of OCD to each other (i.e. no studies have reported that the transition from goal-directed to habitual behavior is more common in patients with prominent sensory phenomena than those with fears or negative thoughts).”
2 of 2

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?

Self-check

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

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

1 of 1

Citations

Cites

Show all 197 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. D’Urso G, Brunoni AR, Mazzaferro MP, Anastasia A, de Bartolomeis A, Mantovani A. Transcranial direct current stimulation for obsessive–compulsive disorder: a randomized, controlled, partial crossover trial. Depression Anxiety. 2016;33:1132–40. · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Shephard, E., Stern, E. R., van den Heuvel, O. A., Costa, D. L. C., Batistuzzo, M. C., Godoy, P. B. G., Lopes, A. C., Brunoni, A. R., Hoexter, M. Q., Shavitt, R. G., Reddy, Y. C. J., Lochner, C., Stein, D. J., Simpson, H. B., & Miguel, E. C.
Affiliations
  • Universidade de São Paulo (BR)
  • Nathan Kline Institute for Psychiatric Research (US)
  • National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences (IN)
  • University of Cape Town (ZA)
  • Columbia University Irving Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Shephard, Elizabeth
Venue
Molecular Psychiatry
Published
2021-01-07
Volume
26
Issue
9
Pages
4583-4604
ISSN
  • 1359-4184 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-5578
OpenAlex
W3118678388
Cited by
250
References
197
Citations by year
2026: 59 · 2025: 44 · 2024: 64 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 18
FWCI
4.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Molecular Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (18/22396-7)
  • Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (2014‐2, 465550/2014-2)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH113250)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Keywords
obsessive-compulsive disorder, clinical phenotype, neuropsychological findings, neuroimaging findings, neuromodulation, pharmacotherapy, behavior therapy
MeSH terms
Humans, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Neuroimaging

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-05, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-05 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

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