ReviewActa psychiatrica Scandinavica2026
Pharmacological and Mechanistic Interventions for Cognitive Impairment Associated With Schizophrenia: A Review of Registered Clinical Trials.
Review in Acta psychiatrica Scandinavica, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Pharmacological and Mechanistic Interventions for Cognitive Impairment Associated With Schizophrenia: A Review of Registered Clinical Trials.Acta psychiatrica Scandinavica · 2026Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSchizophrenia is characterized by positive, negative, and cognitive symptoms. Current pharmacological treatments often fail to address cognitive deficits. In this review of clinical trials, we aim to identify studies that explore neurobiological (non-psychological) strategies to address Cognitive Impairment Associated with Schizophrenia (CIAS).
methodsA search of clinical trial databases was conducted through US National Institutes of Health's ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) on August 2, 2024, with complementary searches performed on July 4 and 10, 2025, for each respective database to update the results.
resultsWe identified 510 relevant interventional studies that objectively measured cognitive performance. Most trials were conducted in the United States (36.4%) and focused on treatment (79%), with randomized designs (88%), investigating drugs (56%), devices (33%), and dietary supplements (10%). Of these trials, 17% reported positive pro-cognitive evidence. Glutamate modulators were the most studied drug category (63 trials), with positive results for sarcosine, BI425809 (Iclepertin), d-serine, d-cycloserine, and minocycline in small-scale trials, although the results were not replicated in larger studies. Nicotinic receptor modulators like ABT-126 and encenicline also showed some cognitive benefits. Device-based interventions, particularly rTMS and iTBS, demonstrated improvements in global cognition, working memory, attention, and processing speed in a subset of trials.
conclusionIn this comprehensive overview of clinical trials on pro-cognitive agents in schizophrenia, we identify emerging opportunities but also acknowledge a lack of replicated evidence. Despite extensive attempts to address CIAS, it remains an undertreated domain, and future trials should explore better ways to treat this important condition.
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.