Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41656097›Full record

SynthesisClinical psychology & psychotherapy

The Assessment of Metacognition in Psychosis: Systematic Review and Future Lines of Research.

Luciana Díaz-Cutraro, Marina Verdaguer-Rodriguez, Marta Ferrer-Quintero, Roger Montserrat, Steffen Moritz, Paul Lysaker, Giancarlo Dimaggio, Carolina Palma-Sevillano, María Lamarca, Victoria Espinosa and 5 more

Abstract readSystematic ReviewReview
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
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

15 authors.

Luciana Díaz-CutraroFundació de Recerca Sant Joan de Déu, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3985-2780
Marina Verdaguer-RodriguezFundació de Recerca Sant Joan de Déu, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain.
Marta Ferrer-QuinteroDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry and Mental Health, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón, IiSGM, CIBERSAM, School of Medicine, Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain.
Roger MontserratFacultat de Psicologia, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2053-8273
Steffen MoritzClinical Neuropsychology Working Group, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8601-0143
Paul LysakerDepartment of Psychiatry, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
Giancarlo DimaggioCentro di Terapia Metacognitiva Interpersonale, Rome, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9289-8756
Carolina Palma-SevillanoGrup COMSAL, Blanquerna FPCEE - Universitat Ramon Llull, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain.
María LamarcaFundació de Recerca Sant Joan de Déu, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain.
Victoria EspinosaFundació de Recerca Sant Joan de Déu, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8099-322X
Rabea FischerClinical Neuropsychology Working Group, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3078-7134
Marina Peniza-SorianoFundació de Recerca Sant Joan de Déu, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain.
Raquel López-CarrileroGrup MERITT, Institut de Recerca Sant Joan de Déu, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain.
Helena García-MieresUniversitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC), Barcelona, Spain.
Susana OchoaGrup MERITT, Institut de Recerca Sant Joan de Déu, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain.

Funding

Instituto de Salud Carlos III FI19/00062Instituto de Salud Carlos III MV20/00019
6 · The paper itself

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

MetacognitionPsychotic DisordersHumansclinical assessmentclinician‐reported measuresmetacognition–assessment–metacognitive modelpatient‐reported measuresresearch assessment

Identifiers

PMID41656097
PMCPMC12883341

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.