Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38842809›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2024

Cognitive Impairments in Drug-Naive Patients With First-Episode Negative Symptom-Dominant Psychosis.

TianHong Zhang, YanYan Wei, XiaoChen Tang, HuiRu Cui, YeGang Hu, LiHua Xu, HaiChun Liu, ZiXuan Wang, Tao Chen, Qiang Hu and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The Paradoxical Effect of Cannabis Use on Cognition in Chronic Psychotic Disorders.Pathophysiology : the official journal of the International Society for Pathophysiology · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

12 authors.

TianHong ZhangShanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Intelligent Psychological Evaluation and Intervention, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Psychotic Disorders, Shanghai, PR China.
YanYan WeiShanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Intelligent Psychological Evaluation and Intervention, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Psychotic Disorders, Shanghai, PR China.
XiaoChen TangShanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Intelligent Psychological Evaluation and Intervention, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Psychotic Disorders, Shanghai, PR China.
HuiRu CuiShanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Intelligent Psychological Evaluation and Intervention, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Psychotic Disorders, Shanghai, PR China.
YeGang HuShanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Intelligent Psychological Evaluation and Intervention, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Psychotic Disorders, Shanghai, PR China.
LiHua XuShanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Intelligent Psychological Evaluation and Intervention, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Psychotic Disorders, Shanghai, PR China.
HaiChun LiuDepartment of Automation, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, PR China.
ZiXuan WangShanghai Xinlianxin Psychological Counseling Center, Shanghai, PR China.
Tao ChenBig Data Research Lab, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
Qiang HuDepartment of Psychiatry, ZhenJiang Mental Health Center, Zhenjiang, PR China.
ChunBo LiShanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Intelligent Psychological Evaluation and Intervention, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Psychotic Disorders, Shanghai, PR China.
JiJun WangShanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Intelligent Psychological Evaluation and Intervention, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Psychotic Disorders, Shanghai, PR China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Available antipsychotic medications are predominantly used to treat positive symptoms, such as hallucinations and delusions, in patients with first-episode psychosis (FEP). However, treating negative and cognitive symptoms, which are closely related to functional outcomes, remains a challenge. Objective: To explore the cognitive characteristics of patients with negative symptom-dominant (NSD) psychosis. Design, Setting, and Participants: This large-scale cross-sectional study of patients with FEP was led by the Shanghai Mental Health Center in China from 2016 to 2021, with participants recruited from 10 psychiatric tertiary hospitals. A comprehensive cognitive assessment was performed among 788 patients with FEP who were drug-naive. Symptom profiles were determined using the Positive and Negative Symptoms Scale (PANSS), and NSD was defined as a PANSS score for negative symptoms higher than that for positive and general symptoms. Positive symptom-dominant (PSD) and general symptom-dominant (GSD) psychosis were defined similarly. Data were analyzed in 2023. Exposure: Psychotic symptoms were categorized into 3 groups: NSD, PSD, and GSD. Main Outcomes and Measures: Neurocognitive performance, assessed using the Chinese version of the Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia Consensus Cognitive Battery. Results: This study included 788 individuals with FEP (median age, 22 [IQR, 17-28] years; 399 men [50.6%]). Patients with NSD exhibited more-pronounced cognitive impairment than did those with PSD or GSD. Specifically, cognitive differences between the NSD and PSD group, as well as between the NSD and GSD group, were most notable in the processing speed and attention domains (Trail Making [F = 4.410; P = .01], Symbol Coding [F = 4.957; P = .007], Verbal Learning [F = 3.198; P = .04], and Continuous Performance [F = 3.057; P = .05]). Patients with PSD and GSD showed no significant cognitive differences. Cognitive impairment was positively associated with the severity of negative symptoms. Most of the cognitive function tests used were able to differentiate patients with NSD from those with PSD and GSD, with significant differences observed across a range of tests, from Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised (χ2 = 3.968; P = .05) to Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia symbol coding (χ2 = 9.765; P = .002). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cross-sectional study of patients with FEP suggest the presence of a clinical subtype characterized by a predominance of negative symptoms and cognitive impairment.

Indexed as

Cognitive DysfunctionPsychotic DisordersAdolescentAdultChinaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleNeuropsychological TestsPsychiatric Status Rating ScalesSchizophreniaYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID38842809
PMCPMC11157355

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.