Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28740818›Full record

ArticleSchizophrenia research. Cognition2016

Disrupted latent inhibition in individuals at ultra high-risk for developing psychosis.

Michael Kraus, Attilio Rapisarda, Max Lam, Jamie Y J Thong, Jimmy Lee, Mythily Subramaniam, Simon L Collinson, Siow Ann Chong, Richard S E Keefe

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Schizophrenia research. Cognition, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Latent Inhibition in Schizophrenia and Schizotypy.Schizophrenia bulletin open · 2023
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. The prediction-error hypothesis of schizophrenia: new data point to circuit-specific changes in dopamine activity.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2022
    Review
  6. Review
  7. The Critical Need for Help-Seeking Controls in Clinical High-Risk Research.Clinical psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2019
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Michael KrausDepartment of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Duke University Medical Center, 200 Trent Drive, Durham, NC, 27710.
Attilio RapisardaResearch Division, Institute of Mental Health, Buangkok Green Medical Park, 10 Buangkok View, Singapore, 539747.
Max LamResearch Division, Institute of Mental Health, Buangkok Green Medical Park, 10 Buangkok View, Singapore, 539747.
Jamie Y J ThongDepartment of Bioengineering, National University of Singapore, Block E4, #04-08, 4 Engineering Drive 3, Singapore, 117583.
Jimmy LeeResearch Division, Institute of Mental Health, Buangkok Green Medical Park, 10 Buangkok View, Singapore, 539747.
Mythily SubramaniamResearch Division, Institute of Mental Health, Buangkok Green Medical Park, 10 Buangkok View, Singapore, 539747.
Simon L CollinsonNeuroscience & Behavioral Disorders, Duke-National University of Singapore, Graduate Medical School, 8 College Road, Singapore, 169857.
Siow Ann ChongResearch Division, Institute of Mental Health, Buangkok Green Medical Park, 10 Buangkok View, Singapore, 539747.
Richard S E KeefeDepartment of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Duke University Medical Center, 200 Trent Drive, Durham, NC, 27710.
National University of Singapore · SGInstitute of Mental Health · SGDuke University · USDuke University Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The addition of off-the-shelf cognitive measures to established prodromal criteria has resulted in limited improvement in the prediction of conversion to psychosis. Tests that assess cognitive processes central to schizophrenia might better identify those at highest risk. The latent inhibition paradigm assesses a subject's tendency to ignore irrelevant stimuli, a process integral to healthy perceptual and cognitive function that has been hypothesized to be a key deficit underlying the development of schizophrenia. In this study, 142 young people at ultra high-risk for developing psychosis and 105 controls were tested on a within-subject latent inhibition paradigm. Additionally, we later inquired about the strategy that each subject employed to complete the test, and further investigated the relationship between reported strategy and the extent of latent inhibition exhibited. Unlike controls, ultra high-risk subjects did not demonstrate a significant latent inhibition effect. This difference between groups became greater when controlling for strategy. The lack of latent inhibition effect in our ultra high-risk sample suggests that individuals at ultra high-risk for psychosis are impaired in their allocation of attentional resources based on past predictive value of repeated stimuli. This fundamental deficit in the allocation of attention may contribute to the broader array of cognitive impairments and clinical symptoms displayed by individuals at ultra high-risk for psychosis.

Indexed as

AdolescenceCognitionHigh-riskPsychosisSchizophrenia

Identifiers

PMID28740818
PMCPMC5514297
OpenAlexW2516626934

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.