4.7 Article

P300 asymmetry in schizophrenia: a meta-analysis

Journal

PSYCHIATRY RESEARCH
Volume 104, Issue 1, Pages 61-74

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0165-1781(01)00297-9

Keywords

evoked potentials; schizophrenia; scalp topography; meta-analysis; asymmetry

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

P300 event-related brain potential (ERP) amplitude is smaller in patients with schizophrenia compared to unaffected controls, but whether left temporal component amplitude is also smaller is debated. The present study employed meta-analytical methods to quantitatively assess previous P300 schizophrenia asymmetry findings. All P300 articles on schizophrenia using an auditory oddball paradigm published before January 2000 were obtained by comprehensive literature searches and cross-referencing for related articles. A total of 19 original articles reporting complete midline electrode data and 11 articles reporting lateral asymmetry electrode data were reviewed, which included different independent conditions that yielded 50 independent data sets. P300 amplitude differences between patients with schizophrenia and control subjects from the midline electrodes yielded effect sizes that differed among recording sites, such that Fz was significantly smaller than Pz, with Cz effect sizes smaller than Pz but larger than Fz. Comparison of P300 amplitude from the lateral data for the T3 and T4 electrodes found no reliable effect size difference when these electrodes were analyzed separately. However, comparison of P300 amplitude effect sizes from the TCP1 was significantly larger than that from the TCP2 when these electrodes were analyzed separately. P300 amplitude is smaller overall in patients with schizophrenia compared to control subjects and differs in its effect size topography across the midline and temporal electrode sites, with the strongest effect sizes obtained for the Pz midline and TCP1 lateral electrodes. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

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