Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34790136›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in psychiatry2021

Neuropsychological Research in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: Current Status and Future Directions.

Himani Kashyap, Amitai Abramovitch

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Externally orienting cues improve cognitive control in OCD.Journal of behavior therapy and experimental psychiatry · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Manipulating levels of uncertainty in a decision-making task for obsessive compulsive disorder.Revista brasileira de psiquiatria (Sao Paulo, Brazil : 1999) · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Role of Cognitive Control in Psychotherapy: An Integrated Review.Indian journal of psychological medicine · 2023
    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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Himani KashyapDepartment of Clinical Psychology, National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro Sciences, Bangalore, India.
Amitai AbramovitchDepartment of Psychology, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, United States.
National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences · INTexas State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neuropsychological functions in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) have been extensively investigated. Despite some common findings across studies indicating deficient test performance across cognitive domains with small to medium effect sizes, results remain inconsistent and heterogeneous. However, multiple past attempts to identify moderators that may account for such variability have been unrewarding. Typical moderators including symptom severity, age at onset, medication status, and comorbid conditions failed to provide sufficient explanatory power. It has then been posited that these inconsistencies may be attributed to the inherent heterogeneous nature of the disorder (i.e., symptom dimensions), or to the natural fluctuation in symptom severity. However, recent meta-analyses suggest that these factors may not account for the persistent unexplained variability. Other potential factors-some of which are unique to neuropsychological testing-received scarce research attention, including definition of cognitive impairments, specificity and selection of test and outcome measures, and their limited ecological validity. Other moderators, particularly motivational aspects, and metacognitive factors (e.g., self-efficacy) were not previously addressed despite their potential association to OCD, and their documented impact on cognitive function. The aim of the present mini-review is to provide an updated succinct overview of the current status of the neuropsychological literature in OCD and expanding upon oft-neglected potential moderators and their putative impact on neuropsychological findings in OCD. Our goal is to highlight important avenues for further research and provide a road map for investigators in order to advance our understanding of cognitive functions in OCD that has been stagnant in the past decade.

Indexed as

cognitive functionecological validityneurocognitiveneuropsychologyobsessive-compulsive disorder

Identifiers

PMID34790136
PMCPMC8591286
OpenAlexW3209459528

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.