Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30718121›Full record

ArticleSchizophrenia research2019

What is the optimal neuropsychological test battery for schizophrenia in China?

Chuan Shi, Lan Kang, Shuqiao Yao, Yibin Ma, Tao Li, Ying Liang, Zhang Cheng, Yifeng Xu, Jianguo Shi, Xiufeng Xu and 5 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Schizophrenia research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  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

15 authors.

Chuan ShiPeking University Sixth Hospital, Beijing, China; Peking University Institute of Mental Health, Beijing, China; NHC Key Laboratory of Mental Health, Ministry of Health (Peking University), Beijing, China; The National Clinical Research Center for Mental Health Disorders (Peking University Sixth Hospital), Beijing, China.
Lan KangPeking University Sixth Hospital, Beijing, China; Peking University Institute of Mental Health, Beijing, China; NHC Key Laboratory of Mental Health, Ministry of Health (Peking University), Beijing, China; The National Clinical Research Center for Mental Health Disorders (Peking University Sixth Hospital), Beijing, China.
Shuqiao YaoThe Medical Psychological Research Center, Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Yibin MaPeking University Sixth Hospital, Beijing, China; Peking University Institute of Mental Health, Beijing, China; NHC Key Laboratory of Mental Health, Ministry of Health (Peking University), Beijing, China; The National Clinical Research Center for Mental Health Disorders (Peking University Sixth Hospital), Beijing, China.
Tao LiPeking University Sixth Hospital, Beijing, China; Peking University Institute of Mental Health, Beijing, China; NHC Key Laboratory of Mental Health, Ministry of Health (Peking University), Beijing, China; The National Clinical Research Center for Mental Health Disorders (Peking University Sixth Hospital), Beijing, China.
Ying LiangPeking University Sixth Hospital, Beijing, China; Peking University Institute of Mental Health, Beijing, China; NHC Key Laboratory of Mental Health, Ministry of Health (Peking University), Beijing, China; The National Clinical Research Center for Mental Health Disorders (Peking University Sixth Hospital), Beijing, China.
Zhang ChengPeking University Sixth Hospital, Beijing, China; Peking University Institute of Mental Health, Beijing, China; NHC Key Laboratory of Mental Health, Ministry of Health (Peking University), Beijing, China; The National Clinical Research Center for Mental Health Disorders (Peking University Sixth Hospital), Beijing, China.
Yifeng XuDivision of Psychotic Disorders, Shanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Jianguo ShiXian Mental Health Center, New Qujiang District, Xian, Shanxi, China.
Xiufeng XuDepartment of Psychiatry, First Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Kunming, Yunnan, China.
Congpei ZhangThe First Haerbin Psychiatric Hospital, Haerbin, Heilongjiang, China.
Donald R FranklinDepartment of Psychiatry, University of California at San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
Robert K HeatonDepartment of Psychiatry, University of California at San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
Hua JinDepartment of Psychiatry, University of California at San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA. Electronic address: hjin@ucsd.edu.
Xin YuPeking University Sixth Hospital, Beijing, China; Peking University Institute of Mental Health, Beijing, China; NHC Key Laboratory of Mental Health, Ministry of Health (Peking University), Beijing, China; The National Clinical Research Center for Mental Health Disorders (Peking University Sixth Hospital), Beijing, China. Electronic address: yuxin@bjmu.edu.cn.

Funding

STRUCTURAL NEUROIMAGING COREP30MH062512 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI Jennifer E Iudicello · 2001 to 2026
$50.4M
NIMH NIH HHS P30 MH062512
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe MATRICS consensus cognitive battery (MCCB) has been widely used to evaluate cognitive deficits in schizophrenia (SCZ), however, no study has formally examined the validity of the MCCB in Chinese SCZ. This study compared Chinese SCZ patients with healthy Chinese controls on the MCCB and some additional neurocognitive tests to determine if the Chinese MCCB is an optimal battery to assess the cognitive deficits in Chinese SCZ patients.

methodThe study enrolled and examined 230 patients met DSM-IV criteria for SCZ and 656 healthy controls matched for gender, age and education. Besides the MCCB, we also included some additional neurocognitive tests that have been widely used in patients with schizophrenia. We selected MCCB and non-MCCB tests with large effect size, to assemble a new "optimal battery" and compared its performance with that of the standard MCCB.

resultsComparing the putative "optimal" battery with the original MCCB, more patients with SCZ were identified as cognitively impaired according to the criteria of GDS ≥ 0.50 for the optimal battery (166 vs 135, or 72.2% vs 58.7%). The rate of cognitive impairment according to MCCB GDS in patients with SCZ who were currently working, ever worked and never worked are 45.5%, 61.6% and 70.8% (p = 0.051), whereas the optimal battery GDS showed 56.4%, 74.8%, 91.7% (p = 0.003), respectively.

conclusionsOur study needs validation with independent samples but suggests that the current "optimal" cognitive battery could be more sensitive than the widely used MCCB in detecting SCZ related cognitive impairment in China.

Indexed as

Cross-Cultural ComparisonSchizophrenic PsychologyAdultChinaChronic DiseaseCognition DisordersFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeuropsychological TestsPsychometricsReference ValuesSchizophreniaChinaCognitive assessmentMATRICSSchizophreniaWorking capacity

Identifiers

PMID30718121
PMCPMC6544499

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.