4.6 Article

Specific executive/attentional deficits in patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder who have a positive family history of psychosis

期刊

JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRIC RESEARCH
卷 37, 期 6, 页码 479-486

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3956(03)00071-2

关键词

cognition; neuropsychology; schizophrenia; bipolar disorder; continuum model of psychosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Neurocognitive impairments are well documented in patients with schizophrenia and their healthy first-degree biological relatives. Less is known about neuropsychological performance in bipolar disorders, but some studies indicate that, compared to schizophrenia, bipolar disorder displays a similar profile pattern with less severe deficits. The genetic and environmental contributions to the development of neurocognitive deficits are also unclear. This study explored the effect of a family history (FH) of psychotic disorders in first-degree relatives on a variety of cognitive domains (abstraction and flexibility, verbal fluency, verbal memory, motor activity and visual-motor processing/attention) in 30 patients with schizophrenia, and 24 type I bipolar patients. After adjusting the results for age, gender, education level and pre-morbid intelligence, patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder with positive FH (n = 18) performed significantly worse than patients with negative FH (n = 36) on the visual-motor processing/ attention domain. These findings were independent of the specific diagnosis. Moreover, when logistic regression analysis was performed, poor Digit Symbol performance was the only predictor of belonging to the positive FH group. Our results are compatible with the existence of some common genetic factors between the illnesses, as well as the involvement of identical, or at least similar, disordered brain systems in both disorders. These findings are discussed within the context of the continuum model of psychosis. (C) 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据