Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35362774›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience2022

Assessment of cognitive impairment in psychosis spectrum disorders through self-reported and interview-based measures.

Ana M Sánchez-Torres, Lucía Moreno-Izco, Gustavo J Gil-Berrozpe, Ruth Lorente-Omeñaca, María Zandio, Amalia Zarzuela, Victor Peralta, Manuel J Cuesta

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
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. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ana M Sánchez-TorresNavarra Institute of Health Research, IdiSNA, Pamplona, Spain.
Lucía Moreno-IzcoNavarra Institute of Health Research, IdiSNA, Pamplona, Spain.
Gustavo J Gil-BerrozpeNavarra Institute of Health Research, IdiSNA, Pamplona, Spain.
Ruth Lorente-OmeñacaNavarra Institute of Health Research, IdiSNA, Pamplona, Spain.
María ZandioNavarra Institute of Health Research, IdiSNA, Pamplona, Spain.
Amalia ZarzuelaNavarra Institute of Health Research, IdiSNA, Pamplona, Spain.
Victor PeraltaNavarra Institute of Health Research, IdiSNA, Pamplona, Spain.
Manuel J CuestaNavarra Institute of Health Research, IdiSNA, Pamplona, Spain. mcuestaz@navarra.es.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0250-5718
Navarre Institute of Health Research · ESServicio Navarro de Salud · ES

Funding

gobierno de navarra 17/31gobierno de navarra 18/41instituto de salud carlos iii 16/2148instituto de salud carlos iii 19/1698
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Self-reported and interview-based measures can be considered coprimary measures of cognitive performance. We aimed to ascertain to what extent cognitive impairment in psychotic disorders, as assessed with a neuropsychological battery, is associated with subjective cognitive complaints compared to difficulties in daily activities caused by cognitive impairment. We assessed 114 patients who had a psychotic disorder with a set of neuropsychological tests and two additional measures: the Cognitive Assessment Interview-Spanish version (CAI-Sp) and the Frankfurt Complaint Questionnaire (FCQ). Patients also underwent a clinical assessment. The CAI-Sp correlated significantly with all the clinical dimensions, while the FCQ correlated only with positive and depressive symptoms. The CAI-Sp correlated significantly with all cognitive domains, except for verbal memory and social cognition. The FCQ was associated with attention, processing speed and working memory. The combination of manic and depressive symptoms and attention, processing speed, working memory and explained 38-46% of the variance in the patients' CAI-Sp. Education and negative symptoms, in combination with attention, processing speed, and executive functions, explained 54-59% of the CAI-Sp rater's variance. Only negative symptoms explained the variance in the CAI-Sp informant scores (37-42%). Depressive symptoms with attention and working memory explained 15% of the FCQ variance. The ability to detect cognitive impairment with the CAI-Sp and the FCQ opens the possibility to consider these instruments to approximate cognitive impairment in clinical settings due to their ease of application and because they are less time-consuming for clinicians.

Indexed as

Cognitive DysfunctionPsychotic DisordersCognitionHumansNeuropsychological TestsSelf ReportCognitionInterview-basedPsychosisSchizophreniaSelf-assessmentSubjective cognitive complaints

Identifiers

PMID35362774
OpenAlexW4220908023

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.