MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109824667 · doi:10.1186/1744-9081-1-14

Neuropsychological measures of attention and memory function in schizophrenia: relationships with symptom dimensions and serum monoamine activity

2005· article· en· W2109824667 on OpenAlexaff
Robert D. Oades, Bernd Röpcke, U. Henning, A. Klimke

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral and Brain Functions · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsChild, Adolescent and Family Mental Health
FundersDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsPsychologyVerbal fluency testStroop effectSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)DopamineCognitionNeuropsychologyAudiologyNeurosciencePsychiatryClinical psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Some clinical symptoms or cognitive functions have been related to the overall state of monoamine activity in patients with schizophrenia, (e.g. inverse correlation of the dopamine metabolite HVA with delusions or visual-masking performance). However, profiles (as presented here) of the relations of the activity of dopamine, noradrenaline and serotonin to neuropsychologic (dys)functions in major patient sub-groups with their very different symptomatic and cognitive characteristics have not been reported. METHODS: Serum measures of dopamine, noradrenaline and serotonin turnover were examined by regression analyses for the prediction of performance on 10 neuropsychological measures reflecting left- and right-hemispheric and frontal-, parietal- and temporal-lobe function in 108 patients with schizophrenia and 63 matched controls. The neuropsychological battery included tests of verbal fluency, Stroop interference, trail-making, block-design, Mooney faces recognition, picture-completion, immediate and delayed visual and verbal recall. Paranoid and nonparanoid subgroups were based on ratings from the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). Groups with high and low ratings of ideas-of-reference and thought-disorder were formed from a median split on the Scale for Assessment of Positive Symptoms (SAPS). RESULTS: Verbal-fluency and Stroop-interference (left frontal and fronto-cingulate function) were negatively associated with noradrenergic turnover in nonparanoid and thought-disordered patients. High dopamine turnover related to speeded trail-making (frontal modulation of set switching) in those with many ideas-of-reference. In contrast, low dopamine turnover predicted poor recall in nonparanoid patients and those with little thought disorder. Serotonin metabolism did not independently contribute to the prediction any measure of cognitive performance. But, with regard to the relative activity between monoaminergic systems, increased HVA/5-HIAA ratios predicted visual-reproduction and Mooney's face-recognition performance (right-hemisphere functions) in highly symptomatic patients. Decreased HVA/MHPG predicted non-verbal recall. CONCLUSION: Clinical state and function are differentially sensitive to overall levels of monoamine activity. In particular, right-lateralised cerebral function was sensitive to the relative activities of the monoamines. Increased noradrenergic activity was associated with enhanced frontal but impaired temporal lobe function in nonparanoid syndromes. Low dopaminergic activity predicted poor attentional set control in those with ideas-of-reference, but poor recall in nonparanoid patients. These data, especially the HVA/5-HIAA ratios, provide a basis for planning the nature of antipsychotic treatment aimed at patient specific symptom dimensions and cognitive abilities.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehavioral and Brain FunctionsSame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207