Psychotic Disorders Division, McLean Hospital, Belmont, MA, USA.
Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Schizophr Bull. 2022 Sep 1;48(5):999-1010. doi: 10.1093/schbul/sbac031.
Youth at clinical high-risk (CHR) for psychosis present with neuropsychological impairments relative to healthy controls (HC), but whether these impairments are distinguishable from those seen among putatively lower risk peers with other psychopathology remains unknown. We hypothesized that any excess impairment among CHR cohorts beyond that seen in other clinical groups is minimal and accounted for by the proportion who transition to psychosis (CHR-T).
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing cognitive performance among CHR youth to clinical comparators (CC) who either sought mental health services but did not meet CHR criteria or presented with verified nonpsychotic psychopathology.
Twenty-one studies were included representing nearly 4000 participants. Individuals at CHR showed substantial cognitive impairments relative to HC (eg, global cognition: g = -0.48 [-0.60, -0.34]), but minimal impairments relative to CC (eg, global cognition: g = -0.13 [-0.20, -0.06]). Any excess impairment among CHR was almost entirely attributable to CHR-T; impairment among youth at CHR without transition (CHR-NT) was typically indistinguishable from CC (eg, global cognition, CHR-T: g = -0.42 [-0.64, -0.19], CHR-NT: g = -0.09 [-0.18, 0.00]; processing speed, CHR-T: g = -0.59 [-0.82, -0.37], CHR-NT: g = -0.12 [-0.25, 0.07]; working memory, CHR-T: g = -0.42 [-0.62, -0.22], CHR-NT: g = -0.03 [-0.14, 0.08]).
Neurocognitive impairment in CHR cohorts should be interpreted cautiously when psychosis or even CHR status is the specific clinical syndrome of interest as these impairments most likely represent a transdiagnostic vs psychosis-specific vulnerability.
与健康对照者(HC)相比,处于精神病临床高风险(CHR)的年轻人存在神经认知障碍,但这些障碍是否与其他精神病理学中风险较低的同龄人所观察到的障碍不同尚不清楚。我们假设,CHR 队列中任何超过其他临床组的额外损伤都是最小的,并且可以用发展为精神病(CHR-T)的比例来解释。
我们对比较 CHR 年轻人与临床对照组(CC)认知表现的研究进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析,CC 组要么寻求心理健康服务但不符合 CHR 标准,要么表现出经证实的非精神病性精神病理学。
共纳入 21 项研究,代表近 4000 名参与者。与 HC 相比,CHR 个体表现出明显的认知障碍(例如,整体认知:g=-0.48[-0.60,-0.34]),但与 CC 相比,障碍较小(例如,整体认知:g=-0.13[-0.20,-0.06])。CHR 中任何额外的损伤几乎完全归因于 CHR-T;未发生转变的 CHR 年轻人(CHR-NT)的损伤通常与 CC 无法区分(例如,整体认知,CHR-T:g=-0.42[-0.64,-0.19],CHR-NT:g=-0.09[-0.18,0.00];加工速度,CHR-T:g=-0.59[-0.82,-0.37],CHR-NT:g=-0.12[-0.25,0.07];工作记忆,CHR-T:g=-0.42[-0.62,-0.22],CHR-NT:g=-0.03[-0.14,0.08])。
当精神病或甚至 CHR 状态是特定的临床综合征时,CHR 队列中的神经认知障碍应谨慎解释,因为这些障碍最有可能代表一种跨诊断而非精神病特异性的脆弱性。