MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404466643 · doi:10.1016/j.ejpsy.2024.100280

Neural bases of referential thinking in schizophrenia spectrum disorders and high-risk mental states: A systematic review

2024· review· en· W4404466643 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniel Santos‐Carrasco, Juan Francisco Rodríguez Testal, Manuel Vázquez-Marrufo

Bibliographic record

VenueThe European Journal of Psychiatry · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMental Health and Psychiatry
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinisterio de UniversidadesMinisterio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades
KeywordsSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)PsychologySchizophrenia spectrumPsychiatryCognitive psychologyClinical psychologyPsychosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• Patients within the schizophrenia spectrum exhibit increased latency in self-referencing • Patients demonstrate a higher frequency of self-references to negative stimuli • The neural basis of referential thinking in schizophrenia is organized into postero-anterior functional hubs • Referential thinking serves as an indicator of progression along the psychotic continuum • Currently, there are both behavioral and biological markers available for psychosis prevention Nowadays, schizophrenia research is moving towards the search for early signs of illness. One of the psychosis progression markers highlighted in scientific literature is referential thinking. Thus, the main objective of this work is to analyze the main forms of assessment of referential thinking, as well as the neural bases underlying this process in people with high-risk mental states and psychotic spectrum disorders. A systematic search was carried out in three electronic databases (Web of Science, PsycInfo, and PubMed). Experimental studies with case-control designs were searched, and then analyzed both bibliographically and based on their potential risk of bias through the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO [CRD42021291691]. Of the 200 potentially relevant studies, 28 met the inclusion criteria. The results showed that the most common way of assessment was the experimental task of making self-reflection about personality phrases and traits. In the studies reviewed, there was a greater number of negative self-references and a greater response latency among the patients when compared to controls. Regarding neural bases, patients showed more neural activity associated with referential thinking in areas such as the dorsomedial and ventromedial prefrontal cortices, the anterior and posterior cingulate cortices, or the precuneus. The results confirm the hypothesis of referential thinking as an indicator of progression in the psychotic continuum, while highlighting a set of areas that could be hyperactivated in a network of postero-anterior functional connectivity. This antero-posterior hub could underlie the referential thinking deficit in neuropsychiatric disorders.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.005
Bibliometrics0.0090.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe European Journal of PsychiatrySame topicMental Health and PsychiatryFrench-language works237,207