SynthesisClinical psychology & psychotherapy
The Assessment of Metacognition in Psychosis: Systematic Review and Future Lines of Research.
Synthesis in Clinical psychology & psychotherapy. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Assessment of Metacognition in Psychosis: Systematic Review and Future Lines of Research.Clinical psychology & psychotherapyPooled it
- Metacognition and Self-Disturbances in Schizophrenia: Implications for Psychological and Neurocognitive Therapy.Brain sciences · 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
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Impaired metacognition, the capacity to understand one's own and others' mental states, has gained increasing attention in psychosis research. Different conceptualizations, psychological treatments and assessment methods have emerged; however, there is a lack of consensus regarding the appropriate tools for clinical and research use. This systematic review had two aims: (1) to compile and organize available assessment tools and (2) to propose an index of metacognitive domains and processes. Instruments were categorized according to authorship, year of use in psychosis, outcomes assessed, language/version, administration time and type of Clinical Outcome Assessment (ClinRO, PRO or PerfO). We identified 42 studies that used 31 instruments. The tools were classified into four domains: Metacognitive Awareness, Metacognitive Capacity, Neurometacognition and Social Metacognition. Our findings highlight the diversity of the available measures and propose a framework for aligning instruments with specific reflective processes. This work represents a practical and theoretical first step toward building consensus and facilitating both the use of available tools according to practical needs and the development of an agreed-upon definition and components of metacognition.
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.