Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31410724›Full record

ReviewThe Psychiatric quarterly2019

Neuropsychiatric Disorders as Erratic Attention Regulation - Lessons from Electrophysiology.

Goded Shahaf

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in The Psychiatric quarterly, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

1 author.

Goded ShahafBrainMARC LTD, Yokneam, Israel. godeds@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Attention related electrophysiological waves, such as P300, often deviate from norm in various populations of neuropsychiatric patients. For example, the amplitude is often smaller and the latency is often longer in major depressive disorder, in bipolar disorder and in schizophrenia. On the other hand, in other neuropsychiatric populations, it is often possible to note the opposite phenomena of larger P300 amplitude and shorter latency in comparison with norm, but only for a specific subset of stimuli. This is often reported in various anxiety disorders, substance abuse and various chronic pain syndromes. These findings in the various clinical populations, on their commonalities and differences, are presented in this work. The prevalence of these two types of deviations in the electrophysiological markers of attention, shared by multiple neuropsychiatric populations, raise interesting questions regarding the role of attention deviation and regulation in neuropsychiatry. We present these questions and outline a possible hypothesis in this regard. Furthermore, such potential sensitivity of the attention-related markers to clinical dynamics suggests they could be candidates for monitoring and, potentially, early-sensing of clinical dynamics. Therefore, we discuss the potential usability of such markers.

Indexed as

ElectroencephalographyAttentionBrain DiseasesEvent-Related Potentials, P300HumansMental DisordersAttentionEEGERPPsychopathology

Identifiers

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.