Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19635240›Full record

ReviewCurrent psychiatry reports2009

Neuropsychological abnormalities in schizophrenia and major mood disorders: similarities and differences.

Deanna M Barch

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
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 49 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

49 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 86 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Ecological validity in cognitive assessment and treatment.Schizophrenia research. Cognition · 2025
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Deanna M BarchDepartment of Psychology, Washington University in St. Louis, Box 1125, One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO 63130, USA. dbarch@artsci.wustl.edu
Washington University in St. Louis · US

Funding

Cognitive Neurocomputational Task Reliability and Clinical Applications ConsortiumR01MH084840 · NIMH · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI Deanna Barch, Cameron S. Carter · 2008 to 2026
$8.5M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH084840
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The past 20 years have been witness to a growing knowledge base of research highlighting the critical importance of cognition in understanding functional status and outcome in schizophrenia. This work has led to an increased emphasis on identifying and evaluating treatments that enhance cognition in schizophrenia, with the hope that this would translate into a better quality of life and improved outcome for patients. At the same time, this research has raised new questions about the specificity of cognitive impairments to schizophrenia and the degree to which similar cognitive impairments may be present in other disorders that can involve psychotic symptoms (eg, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar disorder, and psychotic major depression). This article provides a brief overview of work comparing cognitive function across the nonaffective and affective psychoses and highlights areas of similarity and dissimilarity in the role cognition plays in these disorders.

Indexed as

Cognition DisordersDiagnosis, DifferentialFamilyHumansMajor Depressive DisorderNeuropsychological TestsPsychiatric Status Rating ScalesPsychometricsPsychotic DisordersSchizophreniaSchizophrenic PsychologySeverity of Illness Index

Identifiers

PMID19635240
PMCPMC3836606
OpenAlexW1999943287

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.