ArticleBiomarkers in neuropsychiatry2021
Is a paired-stimuli configuration necessary to obtain typical evoked response differences in studies of psychosis? An MEG study.
Article in Biomarkers in neuropsychiatry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Paired-stimuli (S1-S2) procedures have long been used to assess auditory processing in psychosis. Such studies have shown aberrant evoked responses (ERPs) following long (S1 response) and/or short (S2 response) inter-stimulus intervals. The historical tendency from paired stimuli outcomes in the schizophrenia (SZ) literature is for (i) response to the first stimulus (S1) to be smaller among SZ, and (ii) response to the second stimulus (S2) to be larger among SZ in relation to the size of their S1. An interpretation of these two findings is that SZ have poor auditory response suppression to redundant stimuli ("poor gating"). The present study sought to determine if the reported S1 and S2 effects in SZ (smaller S1 and larger S2 in relation to S1 magnitude) require the paired-stimuli presentation format. Participants (18 schizophrenia and 17 healthy persons) were administered the equivalent of S1 (after a 4.5-sec ISI - "long ISI") and S2 (after a 500-ms ISI - "short ISI") stimuli under four conditions (traditional paired long and short, randomly interleaved long and short, block of long, block of short). Neural activity differences were consistent between-groups independent of condition: (i) schizophrenia cases had greater activity in the pre-stimulus to very early post-stimulus period, (ii) healthy persons had greater M100 activity to long ISI stimuli, and (iii) healthy persons had greater activity after the M50/M100 evoked fields (recovery phase) following short ISI stimuli. Simple early auditory processing in psychosis may be largely independent of stimulus presentation condition, an outcome that may help re-frame future translational studies. Traditional paired-stimuli auditory neural response effects may not require the paired-stimuli format.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.