Article

Cognitive impairment in affective psychoses: a meta-analysis.

Melbourne Neuropsychiatry Centre, Department of Psychiatry, The University of Melbourne and Melbourne Health, Alan Gilbert Building NNF Level 3, Carlton 3053, Australia.
Schizophrenia Bulletin (Impact Factor: 8.61). 09/2009; 36(1):112-25. DOI: 10.1093/schbul/sbp093
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT It has recently been suggested that cognitive impairment should be included in the diagnostic criteria of schizophrenia. One of the main arguments in support of this suggestion has been the hope that cognitive impairment can help distinguish schizophrenia from bipolar disorder (BD). However, recent evidence shows that cognitive deficits occur in BD and persist beyond euthymia. Further, mood disorders with psychotic features might be expected to manifest greater cognitive impairment, which further complicates the potential to differentiate these disorders. The goal of the current meta-analysis was to examine the magnitude and characteristics of cognitive impairments in affective psychoses (AP). A systematic search of the existing literature sourced 27 studies that met the inclusion criteria. These studies compared cognitive performances of 763 patients with AP (550 BD and 213 major depressive disorder) and 1823 healthy controls. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses were used to examine the effects of moderator variables. Meta-analyses of these studies showed that patients with AP were impaired in all 15 cognitive tasks with large effect sizes for most measures. There were no significant differences between the magnitude of impairments between the BD and major depressive disorder groups. The largest effect size was found for symbol coding, stroop task, verbal learning, and category fluency, reflecting impairments in elementary and complex aspects of attentional processing, as well as learning and memory. In general, the pattern of cognitive impairments in AP was similar to reported findings in euthymic patients with BD, but relatively more pronounced.

0 Followers
 · 
175 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Within the field of mental health, the concept of predisposition or that of being "at risk" has been properly addressed by Mrazek and Haggarty. This period prior to clear diagnosis of psychosis has been referred by several names like 'premorbid' phase, at-risk individuals, predisposed individuals, prodromal phase, etc. The premorbid phase is perhaps the most debated term in this list because this term suggests that the morbidity arises only in the overt illness phase. However, evidences arising from several different lines of observations suggest that this may not be the case. In spite of the fact that it has been generally accepted that the prodromal phase precedes the clinical phase, identification of this phase remains a challenge. The real challenge in identifying the onset of the prepsychotic phase is the differentiation of 'normal' experiences from these 'abnormal' experiences. Much fewer studies have been conducted for the assessment of cognitive functions in prodromal phase or predisposed phases of schizophrenia. Cognitive deficits, particularly in memory and attentional functions, are among the most extensively documented aspects of psychosis. Regarding the somatosensory abnormalities in the high-risk individuals, so far there has been only one study conducted which involved somatosensory evoked potentials in these patients.
    Cell Biochemistry and Biophysics 02/2015; DOI:10.1007/s12013-015-0614-8 · 2.38 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: The goal of the current meta-analysis was to review and examine in detail the features of cognitive performance in psychotic (MDDP) versus non-psychotic (MDD) major depressive disorder. Methods: An electronic literature search was performed to find studies comparing cogni-tive performance in MDDP versus MDD. A meta-analysis of broad cognitive domains (processing speed, reasoning/problem solving, verbal learning, visual learning, attention/working memory) and individual cognitive tasks was conducted on all included studies (n ¼ 12). Demographic and clinical features were investigated via meta-regression analysis as moderators of cognitive performance. Results: No difference in socio-demographic and clinical variables was detected between groups. In general, a poorer cognitive performance was detected in MDDP versus MDD subjects (ES¼ 0.38), with a greater effect size in drug-free patients (ES¼0.69). MDDP patients were more impaired in verbal learning (ES¼0.67), visual learning (ES¼0.62) and processing speed (ES¼ 0.71) tasks. A significantly poorer performance was also detected in MDDP patients for individual tasks as Trail Making Test A, WAIS-R digit span backward and WAIS-R digit symbol. Age resulted to have a negative effect on tasks involved in working memory performance. Conclusion: In line with previous meta-analyses, our findings seem to support an association between psychosis and cognitive deficits in the context of affective disorders. Psychosis during the course of MDD is associated with poorer cognitive performance in some specific cognitive domains, such as visual and verbal learning and executive functions. & 2014 Elsevier B.V.
    Journal of Affective Disorders 11/2014; 174. DOI:10.1016/j.jad.2014.11.027 · 3.71 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Considerable data support the phenomenological and temporal continuity between subclinical psychosis and psychotic disorders. In recent years, neurocognitive deficits have increasingly been recognized as a core feature of psychotic illness but there are few data seeking to elucidate the relationship between subclinical psychosis and neurocogntive deficits in non-clinical samples. The goal of the present study was to examine the relationship between subclinical positive and negative symptoms, as measured by the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences (CAPE) and performance on the MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery (MCCB) in a large (n=303) and demographically diverse non-clinical sample. We found that compared to participants with low levels of subclinical positive symptoms, participants with high levels of subclinical positive symptoms performed significantly better in the domains of working memory (p<.001), verbal learning (p=.007) and visual learning (p=.014). Although comparison of participants with high and low levels of subclinical negative symptoms revealed no differences in MCCB performance, we found that individuals with high levels of subclinical negative symptoms performed significantly better on a measure of estimated IQ (WRAT-3 Reading subtest; p=.02) than those with low levels of subclinical negative symptoms. These results are at odds with prior reports that have generally shown a negative relationship between neurocognitive functioning and severity of subclinical psychotic symptoms, and suggest some potential discontinuities between clinically significant psychotic symptoms and sub-syndromal manifestations of psychosis.
    12/2014; 1(4):175-179. DOI:10.1016/j.scog.2014.09.002

Full-text

Download
103 Downloads
Available from
May 28, 2014