SynthesisSchizophrenia research2020
Advancing study of cognitive impairments for antipsychotic-naïve psychosis comparing high-income versus low- and middle-income countries with a focus on urban China: Systematic review of cognition and study methodology.
Synthesis in Schizophrenia research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prioritizing determinants of cognitive function in healthy middle-aged and older adults: insights from a machine learning regression approach in the Canadian longitudinal study on aging.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Targeting Serotonin 5-HTCNS drugs · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundComparing the course of antipsychotic-naïve psychosis in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) may help to illuminate core pathophysiologies associated with this condition. Previous reviews-primarily from high-income countries (HIC)-identified cognitive deficits in antipsychotic-naïve, first-episode psychosis, but did not examine whether individuals with psychosis with longer duration of untreated psychosis (DUP > 5 years) were included, nor whether LMIC were broadly represented.
methodA comprehensive search of PUBMED from January 2002-August 2018 identified 36 studies that compared cognitive functioning in antipsychotic-naïve individuals with psychosis (IWP) and healthy controls, 20 from HIC and 16 from LMIC.
resultsA key gap was identified in that LMIC study samples were primarily shorter DUP (<5 years) and were primarily conducted in urban China. Most studies matched cases and controls for age and gender but only 9 (24%) had sufficient statistical power for cognitive comparisons. Compared with healthy controls, performance of antipsychotic-naïve IWP was significantly worse in 81.3% (230/283) of different tests of cognitive domains assessed (90.1% in LMIC [118/131] and 73.7% [112/152] in HIC).
conclusionsMost LMIC studies of cognition in antipsychotic-naïve IWP adopted standardized procedures and, like HIC studies, found broad-based impairments in cognitive functioning. However, these LMIC studies were often underpowered and primarily included samples typical of HIC: primarily male, young-adult, high-school educated IWP, in their first episode of illness with relatively short DUP (<5 years). To enhance understanding of the long-term natural course of cognitive impairments in untreated psychosis, future studies from LMIC should recruit community-dwelling IWP from rural areas where DUP may be longer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.