Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19011231›Full record

ReviewSchizophrenia bulletin2009

CNTRICS final task selection: social cognitive and affective neuroscience-based measures.

Cameron S Carter, Deanna M Barch, Ruben Gur, Raquel Gur, Amy Pinkham, Kevin Ochsner

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Schizophrenia bulletin, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

59 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Pharmacological Treatment for Social Cognition: Current Evidence.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
  18. Mechanisms Underlying Motivational Dysfunction in Schizophrenia.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2021
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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.

Cameron S CarterUC Davis Imaging Research Center, Sacramento, CA, USA. cameron.carter@ucdmc.ucdavis.edu
Deanna M Barch
Ruben Gur
Raquel Gur
Amy Pinkham
Kevin Ochsner

Funding

Brain-Based Treatment--Impaired Cognition SchizophreniaR13MH078710 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI CARTER, CAMERON S. · 2006 to 2010
$589k
NIMH NIH HHS R13MH078710-03
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article describes the results and recommendations of the third Cognitive Neuroscience Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia meeting related to measuring treatment effects on social and affective processing. At the first meeting, it was recommended that measurement development focuses on the construct of emotion identification and responding. Five Tasks were nominated as candidate measures for this construct via the premeeting web-based survey. Two of the 5 tasks were recommended for immediate translation, the Penn Emotion Recognition Task and the Facial Affect Recognition and the Effects of Situational Context, which provides a measure of emotion identification and responding as well as a related, higher level construct, context-based modulation of emotional responding. This article summarizes the criteria-based, consensus building analysis of each nominated task that led to these 2 paradigms being recommended as priority tasks for development as measures of treatment effects on negative symptoms in schizophrenia.

Indexed as

AffectCognitive ScienceFacial ExpressionNeurosciencesRecognition, PsychologyAnimalsBrainCognition DisordersHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingPsychometricsSchizophrenia

Identifiers

PMID19011231
PMCPMC2643972

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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 OpenQuestion graph.