The DOI matches its Crossref record; 109 of the 109 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Study of Psychopathology from the Network Analysis Perspective: A Systematic Review
Open accessAbstract
Background: Network analysis (NA) is an analytical tool that allows one to explore the map of connections and eventual dynamic influences among symptoms and other elements of mental disorders. In recent years, the use of NA in psychopathology has rapidly grown, which calls for a systematic and critical analysis of its clinical utility. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review of published empirical studies applying NA in psychopathology, between 2010 and 2017, was conducted. We included the literature published in PubMed and PsycINFO using as keywords any combination of “network analysis” with the terms “anxiety,” “affective disorders,” “depression,” “schizophrenia,” “psychosis,” “personality disorders,” “substance abuse” and “psychopathology.” Results: The review showed that NA has been applied in a plethora of mental disorders in adults (i.e., 13 studies on anxiety disorders; 19 on mood disorders; 7 on psychosis; 1 on substance abuse; 1 on borderline personality disorder; 18 on the association of symptoms between disorders), and 6 on childhood and adolescence. Conclusions: A critical examination of the results of each study suggests that NA helps to identify, in an innovative way, important aspects of psychopathology like the centrality of the symptoms in a given disorder as well as the mutual dynamics among symptoms. Yet, despite these promising results, the clinical utility of NA is still uncertain as there are important limitations on the analytic procedures (e.g., reliability of indices), the type of data included (e.g., typically restricted to secondary analysis of already published data), and ultimately, the psychometric and clinical validity of the results.
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
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & for the PRISMA Group (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2535 · Cited by 83,823
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The PRISMA Group (2009) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 · Cited by 64,042
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & the PRISMA Group* (2009) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135 · Cited by 37,554
Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science
Open Science Collaboration (2015) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aac4716 · Cited by 8,515
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
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
A network theory of mental disorders
Borsboom, D. (2017) · World Psychiatry · doi:10.1002/wps.20375 · Cited by 3,482
Kivela, M., Arenas, A., Barthelemy, M., Gleeson, J. P., Moreno, Y., & Porter, M. A. (2014) · Journal of Complex Networks · doi:10.1093/comnet/cnu016 · Cited by 3,235
A tutorial on regularized partial correlation networks
Epskamp, S., & Fried, E. I. (2018) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/met0000167 · Cited by 2,918
Comorbidity: a network perspective
Cramer, A. O. J., Waldorp, L. J., van der Maas, H. L. J., & Borsboom, D. (2010) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x09991567 · Cited by 1,575
Cited by
Robinaugh, D. J., Hoekstra, R. H. A., Toner, E. R., & Borsboom, D. (2020) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291719003404 · Cited by 861
Lack of theory building and testing impedes progress in the factor and network literature
Fried, E. I. (2020) · Psychological Inquiry · doi:10.1080/1047840x.2020.1853461 · Cited by 317
Roefs, 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
A complex systems approach to the study of change in psychotherapy
Hayes, A. M., & Andrews, L. A. (2020) · BMC Medicine · doi:10.1186/s12916-020-01662-2 · Cited by 149
Advancing the Network Theory of Mental Disorders: A Computational Model of Panic Disorder
Robinaugh, D., Haslbeck, J. M. B., Waldorp, L., Kossakowski, J. J., Fried, E. I., Millner, A., McNally, R. J., Ryan, O., de Ron, J., van der Maas, H., et al. (2019) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/km37w · Cited by 120
Metadata
- Authors
- Contreras, A., Nieto, I., Valiente, C., Espinosa, R., & Vazquez, C.
- Venue
- Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics
- Publisher
- S. Karger AG
- Published
- 2019
- Volume
- 88
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 71-83
- ISSN
- 0033-3190 (ISSN-L)
- 1423-0348
- OpenAlex
- W2923522810
- Cited by
- 448
- References
- 109
- FWCI
- 7.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: The Study of Psychopathology from the Network Analysis Perspective: A Systematic Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1159/000497425
- The paper
- Contreras, A., Nieto, I., Valiente, C., Espinosa, R., & Vazquez, C. (2019). The Study of Psychopathology from the Network Analysis Perspective: A Systematic Review. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics. https://doi.org/10.1159/000497425
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.