Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30321433›Full record

ArticleSchizophrenia bulletin2019

Metacognitive Deficits Predict Impaired Insight in Schizophrenia Across Symptom Profiles: A Latent Class Analysis.

Paul H Lysaker, Emily Gagen, Abigail Wright, Jenifer L Vohs, Marina Kukla, Phillip T Yanos, Ilanit Hasson-Ohayon

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Schizophrenia bulletin, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

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

7 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Paul H LysakerDepartment of Psychiatry, Richard L Roudebush VA Medical Center, Indianapolis, IN.
Emily GagenDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
Abigail WrightDepartment of Psychology University of Sussex, Falmer, Sussex, UK.
Jenifer L VohsDepartment of Psychiatry Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN.
Marina KuklaDepartment of Psychiatry, Richard L Roudebush VA Medical Center, Indianapolis, IN.
Phillip T YanosDepartment of Psychology John Jay University, New York, NY.
Ilanit Hasson-OhayonDepartment of Psychology, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel.
Richard L. Roudebush VA Medical Center · USBar-Ilan University · ILIndiana University School of MedicineJohn Jay College of Criminal Justice · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USUniversity of Sussex · GB

Funding

Randomized Controlled Trial of Treatment for Internalized Stigma in SchizophreniaR01MH094310 · NIMH · JOHN JAY COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE · PI YANOS, PHILIP T · 2013 to 2016
$2.4M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH094310
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The integrated model of insight in schizophrenia suggests that poor insight is the result of multiple factors which compromise persons' abilities to integrate streams of information into a personal awareness of psychiatric challenges, and make adaptive responses. This model hypothesizes that metacognitive deficits, or difficulties forming a complex and integrated understanding of the self and others, influence insight, regardless of other proximal causes including clinical profile. To explore this possibility, we performed a latent class analysis on 324 adults with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. This analysis produced 4 groups on the basis of assessment of insight and Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) positive, negative, cognitive, and hostility symptoms. The resultant groups were characterized as: Good Insight/Low Symptoms (n = 71), Impaired Insight/High Negative Symptoms, (n = 43), Impaired Insight/High Positive Symptoms (n = 50) and Impaired Insight/Diffuse Symptoms (n = 160). When we compared metacognitive function as assessed with the Metacognition Assessment Scale - Abbreviated (MAS-A) across groups, we found that the good insight group had better overall metacognition as well as higher levels of self-reflectivity, awareness of the other and mastery as compared to all 3 groups with impaired insight. When controlling for total symptoms, all differences in metacognitive function between the good insight and the impaired insight groups remained significant. These results are consistent with the view that, independent of symptoms, impaired metacognition contributes to difficulties integrating information and hence impedes insight, or awareness of psychiatric challenges. Consistent with extant literature, results suggest that interventions focusing on metacognition as the target may lead to improved insight.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAwarenessFemaleHumansLatent Class AnalysisMaleMetacognitionMiddle AgedPsychotic DisordersSchizophreniaYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID30321433
PMCPMC6293218
OpenAlexW2897962834

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.