Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22169777›Full record

ReviewTrends in cognitive sciences2012

Cognition in schizophrenia: core psychological and neural mechanisms.

Deanna M Barch, Alan Ceaser

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Trends in cognitive sciences, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05105542 (Muscarinic M1 Receptor Availability and Cognition in Schizophrenia), which is not on this map. Cited by 360 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
360citing papers in PubMed, 10 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.

NCT05105542 phase1completednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Muscarinic M1 Receptor Availability and Cognition in Schizophrenia

TypeinterventionalSponsorYale UniversityRan2021 to 2023Enrolled18ConditionsSchizophrenia, Schizoaffective Disorder, HealthyArms11C-EMO - A Novel PET Radiotracer for Muscarinic M1 Receptor, PET Scan
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

360 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Article

300 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

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

Funding

Schizophrenia, Prefrontal Cortex, and Emotion RegulationR01MH066031 · NIMH · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI BARCH, DEANNA · 2004 to 2014
$4.1M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH066031
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The challenge in understanding cognitive impairment in schizophrenia is that people with this illness have deficits in an array of domains. Here, we briefly review evidence regarding the pattern of deficits within three domains: context processing, working memory and episodic memory. We suggest that there may be a common mechanism driving deficits in these domains - an impairment in the ability to actively represent goal information in working memory to guide behavior, a function we refer to as proactive control. We suggest that such deficits in proactive control reflect impairments in dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, its interactions with other brain regions, such as parietal cortex, thalamus and striatum, and the influence of neurotransmitter systems, such as dopamine, GABA and glutamate.

Indexed as

Schizophrenic PsychologyBrain MappingCognitionDopamineHumansMemoryPrefrontal CortexSchizophreniaThalamusDopamine

Identifiers

PMID22169777
PMCPMC3860986

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.