Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34401957›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience2022

Characterising cognitive heterogeneity in individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis: a cluster analysis with clinical and functional outcome prediction.

Kate Haining, Ruchika Gajwani, Joachim Gross, Andrew I Gumley, Robin A A Ince, Stephen M Lawrie, Frauke Schultze-Lutter, Matthias Schwannauer, Peter J Uhlhaas

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Cognitive subtypes in youth at clinical high risk for psychosis.Psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2025
    Article
  7. Exposotypes in psychotic disorders.Scientific reports · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Arketamine for cognitive impairment in psychiatric disorders.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2023
    Review
  19. Rethinking Immunity and Cognition in Clinical High Risk for Psychosis.Current topics in behavioral neurosciences · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Kate HainingInstitute of Neuroscience and Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Ruchika GajwaniInstitute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Joachim GrossInstitute of Neuroscience and Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Andrew I GumleyInstitute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Robin A A InceInstitute of Neuroscience and Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Stephen M LawrieDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Frauke Schultze-LutterDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Medical Faculty, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Matthias SchwannauerDepartment of Clinical Psychology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Peter J UhlhaasInstitute of Neuroscience and Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK. peter.uhlhaas@charite.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0892-2224
University of Glasgow · GBUniversity of Edinburgh · GBCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEUniversity of Bern · CHUniversity of Münster · DE

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/L011689/1Medical Research Council MR/N003403/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Schizophrenia is characterised by cognitive impairments that are already present during early stages, including in the clinical high-risk for psychosis (CHR-P) state and first-episode psychosis (FEP). Moreover, data suggest the presence of distinct cognitive subtypes during early-stage psychosis, with evidence for spared vs. impaired cognitive profiles that may be differentially associated with symptomatic and functional outcomes. Using cluster analysis, we sought to determine whether cognitive subgroups were associated with clinical and functional outcomes in CHR-P individuals. Data were available for 146 CHR-P participants of whom 122 completed a 6- and/or 12-month follow-up; 15 FEP participants; 47 participants not fulfilling CHR-P criteria (CHR-Ns); and 53 healthy controls (HCs). We performed hierarchical cluster analysis on principal components derived from neurocognitive and social cognitive measures. Within the CHR-P group, clusters were compared on clinical and functional variables and examined for associations with global functioning, persistent attenuated psychotic symptoms and transition to psychosis. Two discrete cognitive subgroups emerged across all participants: 45.9% of CHR-P individuals were cognitively impaired compared to 93.3% of FEP, 29.8% of CHR-N and 30.2% of HC participants. Cognitively impaired CHR-P participants also had significantly poorer functioning at baseline and follow-up than their cognitively spared counterparts. Specifically, cluster membership predicted functional but not clinical outcome. Our findings support the existence of distinct cognitive subgroups in CHR-P individuals that are associated with functional outcomes, with implications for early intervention and the understanding of underlying developmental processes.

Indexed as

Cognitive DysfunctionPsychotic DisordersSchizophreniaCluster AnalysisCognitionHumansClinical high-riskCluster analysisCognitionFirst-episode psychosisFunctional outcomeHeterogeneity

Identifiers

PMID34401957
PMCPMC8938352
OpenAlexW3193917088

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.