Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30026711›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in psychology2018

Theoretical Modeling of Cognitive Dysfunction in Schizophrenia by Means of Errors and Corresponding Brain Networks.

Yuliya Zaytseva, Iveta Fajnerová, Boris Dvořáček, Eva Bourama, Ilektra Stamou, Kateřina Šulcová, Jiří Motýl, Jiří Horáček, Mabel Rodriguez, Filip Španiel

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2018. 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
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Structure learning in coupled dynamical systems and dynamic causal modelling.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2019
    Article
  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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yuliya ZaytsevaNational Institute of Mental Health, Klecany, Czechia.
Iveta FajnerováNational Institute of Mental Health, Klecany, Czechia.
Boris DvořáčekNational Institute of Mental Health, Klecany, Czechia.
Eva Bourama3rd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague, Prague, Czechia.
Ilektra Stamou3rd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague, Prague, Czechia.
Kateřina ŠulcováNational Institute of Mental Health, Klecany, Czechia.
Jiří MotýlNational Institute of Mental Health, Klecany, Czechia.
Jiří HoráčekNational Institute of Mental Health, Klecany, Czechia.
Mabel RodriguezNational Institute of Mental Health, Klecany, Czechia.
Filip ŠpanielNational Institute of Mental Health, Klecany, Czechia.
National Institute of Mental Health · CZCharles University · CZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The current evidence of cognitive disturbances and brain alterations in schizophrenia does not provide the plausible explanation of the underlying mechanisms. Neuropsychological studies outlined the cognitive profile of patients with schizophrenia, that embodied the substantial disturbances in perceptual and motor processes, spatial functions, verbal and non-verbal memory, processing speed and executive functioning. Standardized scoring in the majority of the neurocognitive tests renders the index scores or the achievement indicating the severity of the cognitive impairment rather than the actual performance by means of errors. At the same time, the quantitative evaluation may lead to the situation when two patients with the same index score of the particular cognitive test, demonstrate qualitatively different performances. This may support the view why test paradigms that habitually incorporate different cognitive variables associate weakly, reflecting an ambiguity in the interpretation of noted cognitive constructs. With minor exceptions, cognitive functions are not attributed to the localized activity but eventuate from the coordinated activity in the generally dispersed brain networks. Functional neuroimaging has progressively explored the connectivity in the brain networks in the absence of the specific task and during the task processing. The spatio-temporal fluctuations of the activity of the brain areas detected in the resting state and being highly reproducible in numerous studies, resemble the activation and communication patterns during the task performance. Relatedly, the activation in the specific brain regions oftentimes is attributed to a number of cognitive processes. Given the complex organization of the cognitive functions, it becomes crucial to designate the roles of the brain networks in relation to the specific cognitive functions. One possible approach is to identify the commonalities of the deficits across the number of cognitive tests or, common errors in the various tests and identify their common "denominators" in the brain networks. The qualitative characterization of cognitive performance might be beneficial in addressing diffuse cognitive alterations presumably caused by the dysconnectivity of the distributed brain networks. Therefore, in the review, we use this approach in the description of standardized tests in the scope of potential errors in patients with schizophrenia with a subsequent reference to the brain networks.

Indexed as

brain networkscognitive deficitscognitive testserrorsfMRIlesionsschizophrenia

Identifiers

PMID30026711
PMCPMC6042473
OpenAlexW2806887272

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.