SynthesisNeuropsychiatrie : Klinik, Diagnostik, Therapie und Rehabilitation : Organ der Gesellschaft Osterreichischer Nervenarzte und Psychiater2020
Metacognitive beliefs in individuals at risk for psychosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of sex differences.
Synthesis in Neuropsychiatrie : Klinik, Diagnostik, Therapie und Rehabilitation : Organ der Gesellschaft Osterreichischer Nervenarzte und Psychiater, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSex differences were found in several domains in individuals at ultra-high risk for psychosis, but no previous work has systematically reviewed and analysed possible sex differences in metacognition in this population. However, alterations in metacognitive beliefs have been shown in the at-risk mental state for psychosis population. Our aim was to qualitatively review and quantitatively analyse the existing literature for data on sex differences in metacognitive beliefs-mainly depicted by the Metacognitions Questionnaire (MCQ) and its short form (MCQ-30)-in individuals with at-risk mental states.
methodsWe performed a systematic review of the literature on metacognition in help-seeking adolescents and young adults at ultra-high risk for psychosis. We included peer-reviewed articles that included a high-risk for psychosis group assessed with operationalised criteria and instruments. For the quantitative meta-analysis, only studies comparing MCQ data in high-risk individuals were included. A fixed-effect meta-model was used and forest plots drawn for each subscale and overall score. The studies were weighted according to the inverse variance method in order to calculate pooled confidence intervals and p values.
resultsNo article on metacognitive beliefs in individuals at increased risk for psychosis explicitly reported possible sex differences. Our meta-analysis of 234 (57% male) individuals' scores in the MCQ yielded no significant sex difference.
conclusionsCurrently, no sex differences in metacognition can be described in the at-risk population; however, data are insufficient and heterogeneous with regard to thoroughly answering the question whether sex differences in clinical high-risk populations are mirrored in the metacognitive domain.
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.