Cargando…

Meta-analysis of longitudinal neurocognitive performance in people at clinical high-risk for psychosis

Persons at clinical high-risk for psychosis (CHR) are characterised by specific neurocognitive deficits. However, the course of neurocognitive performance during the prodromal period and over the onset of psychosis remains unclear. The aim of this meta-analysis was to synthesise results from follow-...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hedges, Emily P., See, Cheryl, Si, Shuqing, McGuire, Philip, Dickson, Hannah, Kempton, Matthew J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cambridge University Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9386433/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35821623
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0033291722001830
Descripción
Sumario:Persons at clinical high-risk for psychosis (CHR) are characterised by specific neurocognitive deficits. However, the course of neurocognitive performance during the prodromal period and over the onset of psychosis remains unclear. The aim of this meta-analysis was to synthesise results from follow-up studies of CHR individuals to examine longitudinal changes in neurocognitive performance. Three electronic databases were systematically searched to identify articles published up to 31 December 2021. Thirteen studies met inclusion criteria. Study effect sizes (Hedges' g) were calculated and pooled for each neurocognitive task using random-effects meta-analyses. We examined whether changes in performance between baseline and follow-up assessments differed between: (1) CHR and healthy control (HC) individuals, and (2) CHR who did (CHR-T) and did not transition to psychosis (CHR-NT). Meta-analyses found that HC individuals had greater improvements in performance over time compared to CHR for letter fluency (g = −0.32, p = 0.029) and digit span (g = −0.30, p = 0.011) tasks. Second, there were differences in longitudinal performance of CHR-T and CHR-NT in trail making test A (TMT-A) (g = 0.24, p = 0.014) and symbol coding (g = −0.51, p = 0.011). Whilst CHR-NT improved in performance on both tasks, CHR-T improved to a lesser extent in TMT-A and had worsened performance in symbol coding over time. Together, neurocognitive performance generally improved in all groups at follow-up. Yet, evidence suggested that improvements were less pronounced for an overall CHR group, and specifically for CHR-T, in processing speed tasks which may be a relevant domain for interventions aimed to enhance neurocognition in CHR populations.