Association of childhood trauma with cognitive domains in adult patients with mental disorders and in non-clinical populations: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the association between cognitive performances and the onset of psychiatric disorders has been widely investigated, limited research on the role of childhood trauma or early life stress (CT/ELS), and whether this role differs between clinical and non-clinical cohorts is available. This systematic review aims at filling this gap, testing whether the occurrence of CT/ELS and its subtypes are associated with cognitive domains (general cognitive ability, executive functions, working memory, attention, processing speed, verbal/visual memory) in patients with psychiatric disorders and in non-clinical populations. This study followed the PRISMA 2020 guidelines and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for quality assessment. The search was performed until May 2022. Seventy-four studies were classified as eligible. The graphical representations of the results reported an association between exposure to CT/ELS and worse general cognitive ability, verbal/visual memory, processing speed and attention in patients affected by anxiety, mood and psychotic disorders, and that specific CT/ELS subtypes (physical neglect, physical/sexual abuse) can differentially influence specific cognitive abilities (executive functions, attention, working memory, verbal/visual memory). In non-clinical cohorts we found associations between CT/ELS exposure and impairments in executive functions, processing speed and working memory, while physical neglect was related to general cognitive ability and working memory. Concerning the emotional abuse/neglect subtypes in both populations, the results indicated their involvement in cognitive functioning; however, the few studies conducted are not enough to reach definitive conclusions. These findings suggest an association of CT/ELS with specific cognitive deficits and psychopathology.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".