4.7 Article

Neurocognitive profile in adolescents with early-onset schizophrenia: Clinical correlates

Journal

BIOLOGICAL PSYCHIATRY
Volume 58, Issue 9, Pages 705-712

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2005.04.031

Keywords

schizophrenia; adolescents; cognition; generalized deficit; neuropsychology; executive

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Neurocognitive impairments have been documented in adolescents with early-onset schizophrenia (EOS; onset by age 18) and are important treatment targets. Information concerning the severity pattern, and clinical correlates of these deficits in EOS remains limited. Methods: Tests assessing motor skills, attention, memory, visuospatial abilities and executive/functioning were administered to 54 clinically stabilized adolescents with EOS and 52 age- and sex-matched healthy controls. Childhood-onset patients (onset by age 13) were compared to those with an adolescent onset of illness. Patients' neurocognitive profiles were compared to those of controls. Relationships between neurocognitive deficits and demographic and clinical characteristics were explored. Results. Neurocognitive profiles did not differ between childhood- and adolescent-onset participants. Patients showed a generalized neurocognitive deficit of 2.0 SDs compared to controls, with relative deficit in executive functioning and relative sparing of language and visuospatial abilities. Degree of generalized neurocognitive impairment was associated with premorbid adjustment and negative symptom severity (Adjusted R-2 = .39). Conclusions. Results document both a significant generalized de,licit and a relative deficit of executive functioning in adolescents with EOS. The overall pattern is similar to that observed in severely ill first-episode adult patients. The impairments across multiple neurocognitive domains suggest widespread brain dysfunction in EOS.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available