Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22696073›Full record

ArticleSocial psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology2013

Cognitive deficits and ethnicity: a cohort study of early psychosis patients in The Netherlands.

Luyken H Stouten, Wim Veling, Mischa van der Helm, Winfried Laan, Mark van der Gaag

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors.

Luyken H StoutenCentre for Early Psychosis, Parnassia Psychiatric Institute, Lijnbaan 4, 2512 VA, The Hague, The Netherlands. l.stouten@parnassia.nl
Wim Veling
Mischa van der Helm
Winfried Laan
Mark van der Gaag

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeIncidence rates of psychotic disorders are higher in immigrant groups compared to native populations. This increased risk may partly be explained by misdiagnosis. Neurocognitive deficits are a core feature of psychotic disorders, but little is known about the relationship between migration and cognition in psychotic disorders. We examined whether immigrant patients have cognitive deficits similar to non-immigrant patients, in order to investigate the plausibility of misdiagnosis as explanation for increased incidence rates.

methodsPatients who made first contact for non-affective psychotic disorder were assessed in the cognitive domains sustained attention, immediate recall and delayed recall. Immigrant patients were compared to Dutch patients on cognitive performance.

results407 Patients diagnosed with a non-affective psychotic disorder completed cognitive assessment (157 Dutch, 250 immigrants). Both Dutch and immigrant patients showed large cognitive deficits. Between-subgroup comparisons revealed large cognitive deficits for immigrants compared to Dutch, especially for immigrants from Morocco, Turkey and other non-Western countries.

conclusionsThese results indicate that immigrant status is associated with poorer cognitive functioning in early psychosis. The findings argue against diagnostic bias as an explanation for the increased incidence of psychotic disorders in immigrants.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAnalysis of VarianceCognition DisordersCohort StudiesCross-Cultural ComparisonEmigration and ImmigrationEthnicityFemaleHumansIncidenceLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsPsychotic Disorders

Identifiers

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.