Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19470280›Full record

ReviewCurrent psychiatry reports2009

Pervasive developmental disorders and psychosis.

Jean Starling, David Dossetor

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current psychiatry reports, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Evolution in health and medicine Sackler colloquium: Comparative genomics of autism and schizophrenia.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2010
    Review
  10. Article
  11. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jean StarlingDepartment of Psychological Medicine, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Locked Bag 4001, New South Wales 2145, Australia. jeans@chw.edu.au
David Dossetor
Children's Hospital at Westmead · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pervasive developmental disorders (PDDs) and infantile schizophrenia were initially thought to be the same condition, but distinct differences were described in later research. However, attempts to identify psychosis in individuals with PDDs continue to be challenging and controversial. The two disorders share many similar features, including perceptual abnormalities, thought disorder, catatonia, and deficiencies in reality testing. Progress has been made in describing features of PDDs that can be confused with psychosis and in surveying the prevalence of psychotic symptoms in populations with intellectual disability, although there are fewer data on PDD populations. Further research is needed on the longitudinal course of PDDs and the relationships with adult disorders such as psychosis and mood disorders. This research would not only improve the diagnosis and treatment of these complex disorders but would help to unravel the complex brain pathways involved in the perception of the external world that is central to psychosis and PDDs.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAutistic DisorderChildChild Development Disorders, PervasiveCognition DisordersComorbidityCross-Sectional StudiesDiagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental DisordersHumansIntellectual DisabilityNeuropsychological TestsPrevalencePsychiatric Status Rating ScalesPsychotic DisordersSchizophrenia

Identifiers

PMID19470280
OpenAlexW1977171405

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.