Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28437438›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2017

Use of the MATRICS consensus cognitive battery (MCCB) to evaluate cognitive deficits in bipolar disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Qijing Bo, Zhen Mao, Xianbin Li, Zhimin Wang, Chuanyue Wang, Xin Ma

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

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

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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Qijing BoBeijing Key Laboratory of Mental Disorders, Department of Psychiatry, Beijing Anding Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Zhen MaoBeijing Key Laboratory of Mental Disorders, Department of Psychiatry, Beijing Anding Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Xianbin LiBeijing Key Laboratory of Mental Disorders, Department of Psychiatry, Beijing Anding Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Zhimin WangBeijing Key Laboratory of Mental Disorders, Department of Psychiatry, Beijing Anding Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Chuanyue WangBeijing Key Laboratory of Mental Disorders, Department of Psychiatry, Beijing Anding Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Xin MaBeijing Key Laboratory of Mental Disorders, Department of Psychiatry, Beijing Anding Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Beijing Anding Hospital · CNCapital Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition Schizophrenia Consensus Cognitive Battery (MCCB) has also been proposed for use in clinical trials to assess cognitive deficits in patients with bipolar disorder (BD). The aim of this study was to evaluate cognitive function assessed by the MCCB in BD.

methodsA literature search of the PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, SCI, Cochrane Library databases and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register was conducted. Case reports, reviews and meta-analyses were excluded and a systematic review of the remaining studies of cognitive function in BD was carried out. The cognitive outcome measure was the MCCB, including 7 domains and overall cognition. A random-effects model was applied.

resultsEighty eight studies were initially identified. Seven clinical studies comprising a total of 487 patients and 570 healthy controls (HC) were included in the meta-analysis. Patients with BD performed worse than HC in overall cognition and processing speed with a large effect size of >0.8; with a medium effect size (0.5-0.8) in attention, working memory, verbal learning and visual learning; and with a small effect size (0.2-0.5) in reasoning and problem solving and social cognition.

conclusionPatients with BD performed worse than HC in overall cognition and all cognitive domains of the MCCB. Cognitive deficits in domains of processing speed and working memory are prominent in patients with BD. Our findings suggest that MCCB can be usefully applied in BD.

Indexed as

Bipolar DisorderCognitionCognition DisordersHumansNeuropsychological Tests

Identifiers

PMID28437438
PMCPMC5402962
OpenAlexW2607950231

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.