Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30642411›Full record

ArticlePsychological medicine2019

Parsing components of auditory predictive coding in schizophrenia using a roving standard mismatch negativity paradigm.

Amanda McCleery, Daniel H Mathalon, Jonathan K Wynn, Brian J Roach, Gerhard S Hellemann, Stephen R Marder, Michael F Green

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychological medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Reliability of mismatch negativity event-related potentials in a multisite, traveling subjects study.Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2020
    Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Stability of mismatch negativity event-related potentials in a multisite study.International journal of methods in psychiatric research · 2020
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Making Sense of Mismatch Negativity.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2020
    Review
  18. Review
  19. 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.

Amanda McCleerySemel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior, UCLA,Los Angeles, CA,USA.
Daniel H MathalonVeterans Affairs San Francisco Healthcare System,San Francisco, CA,USA.
Jonathan K WynnSemel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior, UCLA,Los Angeles, CA,USA.
Brian J RoachVeterans Affairs San Francisco Healthcare System,San Francisco, CA,USA.
Gerhard S HellemannSemel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior, UCLA,Los Angeles, CA,USA.
Stephen R MarderSemel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior, UCLA,Los Angeles, CA,USA.
Michael F GreenSemel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior, UCLA,Los Angeles, CA,USA.

Funding

Cognitive and Affective Dysfunctions in the PsychosesT32MH096682 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI NUECHTERLEIN, KEITH H · 2013 to 2018
$1.1M
Cortical Plasticity Across Phase of Illness in SchizophreniaK23MH108829 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI MCCLEERY, AMANDA · 2016 to 2022
$910k
NIMH NIH HHS K23 MH108829NIMH NIH HHS T32 MH096682
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMismatch negativity (MMN) is an event-related potential (ERP) component reflecting auditory predictive coding. Repeated standard tones evoke increasing positivity ('repetition positivity'; RP), reflecting strengthening of the standard's memory trace and the prediction it will recur. Likewise, deviant tones preceded by more standard repetitions evoke greater negativity ('deviant negativity'; DN), reflecting stronger prediction error signaling. These memory trace effects are also evident in MMN difference wave. Here, we assess group differences and test-retest reliability of these indices in schizophrenia patients (SZ) and healthy controls (HC).

methodsElectroencephalography was recorded twice, 2 weeks apart, from 43 SZ and 30 HC, during a roving standard paradigm. We examined ERPs to the third, eighth, and 33rd standards (RP), immediately subsequent deviants (DN), and the corresponding MMN. Memory trace effects were assessed by comparing amplitudes associated with the three standard repetition trains.

resultsCompared with controls, SZ showed reduced MMNs and DNs, but normal RPs. Both groups showed memory trace effects for RP, MMN, and DN, with a trend for attenuated DNs in SZ. Intraclass correlations obtained via this paradigm indicated good-to-moderate reliabilities for overall MMN, DN and RP, but moderate to poor reliabilities for components associated with short, intermediate, and long standard trains, and poor reliability of their memory trace effects.

conclusionMMN deficits in SZ reflected attenuated prediction error signaling (DN), with relatively intact predictive code formation (RP) and memory trace effects. This roving standard MMN paradigm requires additional development/validation to obtain suitable levels of reliability for use in clinical trials.

Indexed as

ElectroencephalographySchizophrenic PsychologyAdolescentAdultAttentionEvoked Potentials, AuditoryFemaleHumansMaleMental RecallMiddle AgedSchizophreniaYoung Adultdeviant negativitymemory tracemismatch negativityprediction error signalingpredictive codingpsychotic disordersrepetition negativity

Identifiers

PMID30642411
PMCPMC6499668

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.