ReviewFrontiers in psychology2026
Cognitive functioning as an underutilized determinant of treatment planning: a review in alcohol use disorder.
Review in Frontiers in psychology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Cognitive functioning is a critical determinant of treatment engagement, learning, and functional recovery across psychiatric disorders, yet it remains insufficiently integrated into treatment planning. While cognitive impairment is well documented in alcohol use disorder (AUD), its role is most often limited to a prognostic marker rather than an actionable input into clinical decision-making. This review examines how cognitive and neuropsychological functioning have been assessed and used to inform treatment planning in AUD. Methods: A PubMed (MEDLINE) search was performed on primary studies involving adults with AUD leading up to 2026, in which cognitive or neuropsychological assessment influenced, or was intended to influence, treatment planning or clinical decision-making. Studies assessing cognition solely as an outcome were excluded. Twenty-three (23) studies met inclusion criteria. Study designs included observational cohorts, feasibility trials, and controlled trials. Cognitive domains, assessment approaches, and treatment-related outcomes were synthesized narratively. Results: Across studies, cognitive functioning, particularly amongst executive function, attention, and memory domains, were consistently associated with treatment engagement, retention, and functional outcomes. Still, cognition was most often examined as a prognostic factor as opposed to an explicit input to treatment allocation or adaptation. Only a few studies incorporated cognitive assessment into treatment orientation or treatment modality selection. Assessment methods varied widely, limiting comparability and scalability. Conclusions: Cognitive functioning is clinically relevant, but current evidence characterizes it predominantly as a prognostic marker rather than a demonstrated, actionable input into treatment planning. Dedicated research testing cognition-informed treatment allocation and adaptation is needed before its routine incorporation into AUD care can be recommended.
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.