The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Bridge Centrality: A Network Approach to Understanding Comorbidity
Abstract
Recently, researchers in clinical psychology have endeavored to create network models of the relationships between symptoms, both within and across mental disorders. Symptoms that connect two mental disorders are called "bridge symptoms." Unfortunately, no formal quantitative methods for identifying these bridge symptoms exist. Accordingly, we developed four network statistics to identify bridge symptoms: bridge strength, bridge betweenness, bridge closeness, and bridge expected influence. These statistics are nonspecific to the type of network estimated, making them potentially useful in individual-level psychometric networks, group-level psychometric networks, and networks outside the field of psychopathology such as social networks. We first tested the fidelity of our statistics in predicting bridge nodes in a series of simulations. Averaged across all conditions, the statistics achieved a sensitivity of 92.7% and a specificity of 84.9%. By simulating datasets of varying sample sizes, we tested the robustness of our statistics, confirming their suitability for network psychometrics. Furthermore, we simulated the contagion of one mental disorder to another, showing that deactivating bridge nodes prevents the spread of comorbidity (i.e., one disorder activating another). Eliminating nodes based on bridge statistics was more effective than eliminating nodes high on traditional centrality statistics in preventing comorbidity. Finally, we applied our algorithms to 18 group-level empirical comorbidity networks from published studies and discussed the implications of this analysis.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
R Core Team (2025) · doi:10.32614/r.manuals · Cited by 352,181
null (2016) · Philosophy Study · doi:10.17265/2159-5313/2016.09.003 · Cited by 28,317
Kessler, R. C., Chiu, W. T., Demler, O., & Walters, E. E. (2005) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.62.6.617 · Cited by 12,052
Estimating psychological networks and their accuracy: A tutorial paper
Epskamp, S., Borsboom, D., & Fried, E. I. (2018) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-017-0862-1 · Cited by 5,715
qgraph: Network Visualizations of Relationships in Psychometric Data
Epskamp, S., Cramer, A. O. J., Waldorp, L. J., Schmittmann, V. D., & Borsboom, D. (2012) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v048.i04 · Cited by 4,856
Network analysis: An integrative approach to the structure of psychopathology
Borsboom, D., & Cramer, A. O. J. (2013) · Annual Review of Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-050212-185608 · Cited by 4,359
Node centrality in weighted networks: Generalizing degree and shortest paths
Opsahl, T., Agneessens, F., & Skvoretz, J. (2010) · Social Networks · doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2010.03.006 · Cited by 3,718
A network theory of mental disorders
Borsboom, D. (2017) · World Psychiatry · doi:10.1002/wps.20375 · Cited by 3,482
Relative Importance for Linear Regression in R : The Package relaimpo
Grömping, U. (2006) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v017.i01 · Cited by 2,615
Social disconnectedness, perceived isolation, and health among older adults
Cornwell, E. Y., & Waite, L. J. (2009) · Journal of Health and Social Behavior · doi:10.1177/002214650905000103 · Cited by 2,027
Cited by
Kaiser, T., Herzog, P., Voderholzer, U., & Brakemeier, E. (2021) · Depression and Anxiety · doi:10.1002/da.23136 · Cited by 296
“For example, the examination of so‐called “bridge nodes” (Jones et al., 2019), which are strongly connected with symptoms of other disorders, may provide more insights into the role of individual symptoms.”
BackgroundMethodRoefs, A., Fried, E. I., Kindt, M., Martijn, C., Elzinga, B., Evers, A. W. M., Wiers, R. W., Borsboom, D., & Jansen, A. (2022) · Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.brat.2022.104096 · Cited by 185
Monteleone, A. M., & Cascino, G. (2021) · European Eating Disorders Review · doi:10.1002/erv.2834 · Cited by 150
Everaert, J., & Joormann, J. (2019) · Clinical Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/2167702619859342 · Cited by 119
Peng, P., & Liao, Y. (2023) · BMC Psychiatry · doi:10.1186/s12888-023-04837-2 · Cited by 114
Metadata
- Authors
- Jones, P. J., Ma, R., & McNally, R. J.
- Venue
- Multivariate Behavioral Research
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2019-06-10
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 353-367
- ISSN
- 0027-3171 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7906
- OpenAlex
- W2801359717
- Cited by
- 1,741
- References
- 48
- FWCI
- 78.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Bridge Centrality: A Network Approach to Understanding Comorbidity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/00273171.2019.1614898
- The paper
- Jones, P. J., Ma, R., & McNally, R. J. (2021). Bridge Centrality: A Network Approach to Understanding Comorbidity. Multivariate Behavioral Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2019.1614898
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.