Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34132736›Full record

ArticleJAMA psychiatry2021

Neurocognitive Functioning in Individuals at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Ana Catalan, Gonzalo Salazar de Pablo, Claudia Aymerich, Stefano Damiani, Veronica Sordi, Joaquim Radua, Dominic Oliver, Philip McGuire, Anthony J Giuliano, William S Stone and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA psychiatry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 134 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
134citing papers in PubMed, 13 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

134 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

74 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

11 authors.

Ana CatalanPsychiatry Department, Basurto University Hospital, Bilbao, Spain.
Gonzalo Salazar de PabloEarly Psychosis: Interventions and Clinical-detection (EPIC) Lab, Department of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Claudia AymerichPsychiatry Department, Basurto University Hospital, Bilbao, Spain.
Stefano DamianiDepartment of Brain and Behavioral Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy.
Veronica SordiDepartment of Brain and Behavioral Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy.
Joaquim RaduaEarly Psychosis: Interventions and Clinical-detection (EPIC) Lab, Department of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Dominic OliverEarly Psychosis: Interventions and Clinical-detection (EPIC) Lab, Department of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Philip McGuireNational Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre, London, United Kingdom.
Anthony J GiulianoWorcester Recovery Center & Hospital, Massachusetts Department of Mental Health, Boston.
William S StoneDepartment of Psychiatry, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Paolo Fusar-PoliEarly Psychosis: Interventions and Clinical-detection (EPIC) Lab, Department of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importanceNeurocognitive functioning is a potential biomarker to advance detection, prognosis, and preventive care for individuals at clinical high risk for psychosis (CHR-P). The current consistency and magnitude of neurocognitive functioning in individuals at CHR-P are undetermined.

objectiveTo provide an updated synthesis of evidence on the consistency and magnitude of neurocognitive functioning in individuals at CHR-P. DATA SOURCES: Web of Science database, Cochrane Central Register of Reviews, and Ovid/PsycINFO and trial registries up to July 1, 2020. STUDY SELECTION: Multistep literature search compliant with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses and Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology performed by independent researchers to identify original studies reporting on neurocognitive functioning in individuals at CHR-P. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Independent researchers extracted the data, clustering the neurocognitive tasks according to 7 Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia (MATRICS) domains and 8 CHR-P domains. Random-effect model meta-analyses, assessment of publication biases and study quality, and meta-regressions were conducted. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary effect size measure was Hedges g of neurocognitive functioning in individuals at CHR-P (1) compared with healthy control (HC) individuals or (2) compared with individuals with first-episode psychosis (FEP) or (3) stratified for the longitudinal transition to psychosis.

resultsA total of 78 independent studies were included, consisting of 5162 individuals at CHR-P (mean [SD; range] age, 20.2 [3.3; 12.0-29.0] years; 2529 [49.0%] were female), 2865 HC individuals (mean [SD; range] age, 21.1 [3.6; 12.6-29.2] years; 1490 [52.0%] were female), and 486 individuals with FEP (mean [SD; range] age, 23.0 [2.0; 19.1-26.4] years; 267 [55.9%] were female). Compared with HC individuals, individuals at CHR-P showed medium to large deficits on the Stroop color word reading task (g = -1.17; 95% CI, -1.86 to -0.48), Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised (g = -0.86; 95% CI, -1.43 to -0.28), digit symbol coding test (g = -0.74; 95% CI, -1.19 to -0.29), Brief Assessment of Cognition Scale Symbol Coding (g = -0.67; 95% CI, -0.95 to -0.39), University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (g = -0.55; 95% CI, -0.97 to -0.12), Hinting Task (g = -0.53; 95% CI, -0.77 to -0.28), Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (g = -0.50; 95% CI, -0.78 to -0.21), California Verbal Learning Test (CVLT) (g = -0.50; 95% CI, -0.64 to -0.36), and National Adult Reading Test (g = -0.52; 95% CI, -1.01 to -0.03). Individuals at CHR-P were less impaired than individuals with FEP. Longitudinal transition to psychosis from a CHR-P state was associated with medium to large deficits in the CVLT task (g = -0.58; 95% CI, -1.12 to -0.05). Meta-regressions found significant effects for age and education on processing speed. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Findings from this meta-analysis support neurocognitive dysfunction as a potential detection and prognostic biomarker in individuals at CHR-P. These findings may advance clinical research and inform preventive approaches.

Identifiers

PMID34132736
PMCPMC8209603

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.