Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34202881›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2021

Executive Dysfunctions in Schizophrenia: A Critical Review of Traditional, Ecological, and Virtual Reality Assessments.

Ernest Tyburski, Monika Mak, Andrzej Sokołowski, Anna Starkowska, Ewa Karabanowicz, Magdalena Kerestey, Zofia Lebiecka, Joanna Preś, Leszek Sagan, Jerzy Samochowiec and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Ernest TyburskiInstitute of Psychology, SWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities, 61-719 Poznań, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-4658-9119
Monika MakDepartment of Health Psychology, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, 71-457 Szczecin, Poland.
Andrzej SokołowskiMemory and Aging Center, Department of Neurology, UCSF Weill Institute for Neurosciences, University of California, 675 Nelson Rising Lane, Suite 190, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA.
Anna StarkowskaFaculty of Psychology in Wrocław, SWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities, 53-238 Wrocław, Poland.
Ewa KarabanowiczInstitute of Psychology, University of Szczecin, 71-017 Szczecin, Poland.
Magdalena KeresteyInstitute of Psychology, University of Szczecin, 71-017 Szczecin, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-7395-7730
Zofia LebieckaDepartment of Health Psychology, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, 71-457 Szczecin, Poland.
Joanna PreśDepartment of Health Psychology, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, 71-457 Szczecin, Poland.
Leszek SaganDepartment of Neurosurgery, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, 71-252 Szczecin, Poland.
Jerzy SamochowiecDepartment of Psychiatry, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, 71-457 Szczecin, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-1438-583X
Ashok S JansariDepartment of Psychology, Goldsmiths, University of London, New Cross, London SE14 6NW, UK.
Pomeranian Medical University · PLUniversity of Szczecin · PLUniwersytet SWPS · PLGoldsmiths University of London · GB

Funding

Faculty of Humanities at the University of Szczecin 504-3000-240-940/2015Faculty of Humanities at the University of Szczecin 504-3000-240-940/2016National Science Centre in Poland 2020/04/X/HS6/01920Polish Minister of Science and Higher Education's program named "Regional Initiative of Excel-lence" in 2019-2022 002/RID/2018/2019Polish Minister of Science and Higher Education's program named "Regional Initiative of Excel-lence" in 2019-2022 012/RID/2018/2019Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin FSN-246-05/2017Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin FSN-337-06/2016
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, interest has grown in measuring executive function in schizophrenia with ecological and virtual reality (VR) tools. However, there is a lack of critical analysis comparing those tools with traditional ones. This paper aims to characterize executive dysfunction in schizophrenia by comparing ecological and virtual reality assessments with traditional tools, and to describe the neurobiological and psychopathological correlates. The analysis revealed that ecological and VR tests have higher levels of verisimilitude and similar levels of veridicality compared to traditional tools. Both negative symptoms and disorganization correlate significantly with executive dysfunction as measured by traditional tools, but their relationships with measures based on ecological and VR methods are still unclear. Although there is much research on brain correlates of executive impairments in schizophrenia with traditional tools, it is uncertain if these results will be confirmed with the use of ecological and VR tools. In the diagnosis of executive dysfunction, it is important to use a variety of neuropsychological methods-especially those with confirmed ecological validity-to properly recognize the underlying characteristics of the observed deficits and to implement effective forms of therapy.

Indexed as

cognitive functionsecological validityexecutive functionsneuropsychologypsychopathological dimensionsschizophreniavirtual reality

Identifiers

PMID34202881
PMCPMC8267962
OpenAlexW3176645530

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.