ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2025
Minor physical anomalies and social cognition in patients with schizophrenia and their first degree relatives.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2025. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Minor physical anomlalies (MPAs) are early dysmorphogenetic findings that can be frequently detected in both schizophrenia patients and their relatives, and deficits in social cognitive abilities have been shown in both groups. We aimed to investigate whether there is a relationship between MPAs and social cognition in both the patient group and the patient relatives. Method: Thirty-four schizophrenia patients in remission, 34 their first-degree relatives, and 34 healthy controls were included in the study. Participants were assessed for minor physical anomalies using the Minor Physical Anomalies Scale (MPAS), and for theory of mind using Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test (RMET) and Dokuz Eylül Theory of Mind Index (DEToMI). Results: Patients performed significantly worse than healthy controls on the DEToMI subtests 'first-order false belief', 'second-order false belief', 'faux pas' and 'DEToMI total' (p=0.003, p=0.001, p=0.016 and p=0.001, respectively). The mean scores of patients in RMET were significantly lower than those of patients' relatives and healthy controls (p=0.012 and p<0.001, respectively). Patients with mouth anomalies performed worse on the first-order false belief subtest than those without (p=0.029), and there was a negative correlation between mouth involvement and first-order false belief subtest performance in group I (r=-0.381; p=0.026). Patients with ear anomalies performed better on the irony/hinting subtest than those without (p=0.048), and there was a positive correlation between ear involvement and irony/hinting subtest performance in group I (r=0.364; p=0.034). Relatives of patients with mouth anomalies performed worse than those without on the second-order false belief subtest (p=0.043), and there was a negative correlation between mouth involvement and second-order false belief subtest performance in group II (r=-0.353; p=0.041). Apart from these significant findings, no significant association was found between DEToMI and RMET performances and MPAs in all groups. Conclusion: The present study's findings considering the associations between minor physical anomalies and social cognition in schizophrenia patients and their first degree relatives would supply new perspectives in the clinicians' assessment of schizophrenia patients. Further research of this possible link with similar studies may be beneficial in better understanding the nature of the disease and in more comprehensive clinical evaluations of patients.
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.