4.6 Article

Cognitive Impairment in Affective Psychoses: A Meta-analysis

Journal

SCHIZOPHRENIA BULLETIN
Volume 36, Issue 1, Pages 112-125

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/schbul/sbp093

Keywords

schizophrenia; psychosis; bipolar disorder; depression; cognition

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

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.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available