Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Psychology, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, USA.
Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Psychiatry Res. 2015 Jul 30;228(1):112-20. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2015.04.025. Epub 2015 Apr 30.
The inconsistent nature of the neuropsychology literature pertaining to obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) has long been recognized. However, individual studies, systematic reviews, and recent meta-analytic reviews were unsuccessful in establishing a consensus regarding a disorder-specific neuropsychological profile. In an attempt to identify methodological factors that may contribute to the inconsistency that is characteristic of this body of research, a systematic review of methodological factors in studies comparing OCD patients and non-psychiatric controls on neuropsychological tests was conducted. This review covered 115 studies that included nearly 3500 patients. Results revealed a range of methodological weaknesses. Some of these weaknesses have been previously noted in the broader neuropsychological literature, while some are more specific to psychiatric disorders, and to OCD. These methodological shortcomings have the potential to hinder the identification of a specific neuropsychological profile associated with OCD as well as to obscure the association between neurocognitive dysfunctions and contemporary neurobiological models. Rectifying these weaknesses may facilitate replicability, and promote our ability to extract cogent, meaningful, and more unified inferences regarding the neuropsychology of OCD. To that end, we present a set of methodological recommendations to facilitate future neuropsychology research in psychiatric disorders in general, and in OCD in particular.
神经心理学文献中关于强迫症(OCD)的不一致性早已得到认可。然而,个别研究、系统评价和最近的荟萃分析都未能就特定于疾病的神经心理学特征达成共识。为了确定可能导致该研究领域特征性不一致的方法学因素,对比较强迫症患者和非精神科对照在神经心理学测试上的研究中的方法学因素进行了系统回顾。本综述涵盖了 115 项研究,其中包括近 3500 名患者。结果显示出一系列方法学上的弱点。其中一些弱点在更广泛的神经心理学文献中已经被注意到,而有些则更特定于精神疾病,尤其是强迫症。这些方法学上的缺陷有可能阻碍与 OCD 相关的特定神经心理学特征的识别,并掩盖神经认知功能障碍与当代神经生物学模型之间的关联。纠正这些缺陷可以促进可重复性,并提高我们从强迫症的神经心理学中提取有力、有意义和更统一的推论的能力。为此,我们提出了一套方法学建议,以促进一般精神疾病,特别是强迫症的神经心理学研究。