ArticlePsychological assessment2026
Computerized adaptive testing of neurocognitive deficits in psychosis.
Article in Psychological assessment, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Computerized adaptive testing (CAT) is a technology that has been used to improve the precision and efficiency of individual difference estimates for cognitive, achievement, personality, and clinical symptom assessments. Motivated by the psychometric limitations of experimental cognitive tasks, we determined whether experimental cognitive tasks, such as those being developed for the National Institute of Mental Health's Research Domain Criteria initiative and similar projects, could also benefit from CAT. Participants were 64 patients diagnosed with psychosis spectrum disorders and 50 healthy controls who completed at least one of six experimental cognitive tasks: a probabilistic learning task (PLT), a continuous performance task (CPT), a flanker task, a Sternberg task, a self-ordered pointing task (SOPT), and an N-back task. Results indicated strong correlations between ability estimates for fixed and CAT versions of most tasks, except the PLT. CAT significantly reduced standard error for the CPT, Sternberg, and SOPT, but not for the N-back, flanker, or PLT. The tasks benefiting most from CAT were those with more fine-grained levels of difficulty. These findings suggest that adaptive testing can improve the psychometric properties of experimental cognitive tasks relevant to the Research Domain Criteria framework. This improvement depends on the granularity of conditions and difficulty levels, however, highlighting an important consideration for integrating CAT into cognitive psychopathology research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).
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.