Cited by 57Inflammatory Bowel DiseaseCancer-related cognitive impairment studiesDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research

Cognitive Impairment in Adult Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Open access
Hopkins, Christopher W.P., Powell, Nick, Norton, Christine, Dumbrill, Jonathan L., Hayee, Bu’Hussain, Moulton, Calum D.·2021·Journal of the Academy of Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry

Abstract

Background People living with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are exposed to multiple risk factors for cognitive impairment and frequently report cognitive difficulties. However, the presence of cognitive impairment in IBD has not been systematically reviewed.Methods Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we performed a systematic multidatabase search for cross-sectional and longitudinal studies comparing adults with IBD versus healthy controls for domain-specific cognitive function or scores on multidomain cognitive screening tools. For any domain reported by 3 or more studies, we conducted random-effects meta-analysis to calculate the standardized mean difference between groups; lower scores reflected poorer performance. Between-study heterogeneity was assessed using the I 2 statistic and study quality assessed using an IBD-modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale.Results Of 8302 articles screened, 12 studies (n = 687) were included in the qualitative synthesis and 11 in meta-analyses. All studies were cross-sectional. Studies generally excluded people with active IBD and older adults. Despite no significant differences on multidomain screening tools such as the Mini Mental State Examination (-0.27 [95% confidence interval -0.68, 0.08], P = 0.14), people with IBD showed significant deficits compared with healthy controls in attention (standardized mean difference -0.36 [-0.60, -0.12], P = 0.003, I 2 = 0%), executive function (standardized mean difference -0.45 [-0.77, -0.13, P = 0.005, I 2 = 42.5%), and specifically in working memory (standardized mean difference -0.58 [-0.85, -0.30], P < 0.001, I 2 = 0%). Deficits in learning and recall were nonsignificant (P = 0.089) and other domains insufficient for meta-analysis.Conclusions People with IBD show deficits in attention and executive function, particularly in working memory, suggesting that cognitive impairment is a potential extraintestinal manifestation of IBD.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.psym.2020.10.002

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A systematic multi-database study comparing adult IBD patients versus healthy controls (n = 687) concluded that IBD patients had significant deficits in attention, executive function, and working memory compared with healthy controls.

    “a systematic multi-database study comparing adult IBD patients versus healthy controls (n = 687) concluded that IBD patients had significant deficits in attention, executive function, and working memory compared with healthy controls, suggesting that cognitive impairment is a potential extraintestinal manifestation of IBD [95].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hopkins, C. W. P., Powell, N., Norton, C., Dumbrill, J. L., Hayee, B., & Moulton, C. D.
Affiliations
  • Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • Imperial College London (GB)
  • King's College London (GB)
  • University of Manchester (GB)
  • King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
Corresponding author
Moulton, Calum D.
Venue
Journal of the Academy of Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-07
Volume
62
Issue
4
Pages
387-403
ISSN
2667-2960 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3118990225
Cited by
57
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 1
FWCI
1.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the Academy of Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
National Institute for Health Research
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Inflammatory Bowel Disease
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Cancer-related cognitive impairment studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Keywords
inflammatory bowel disease, cognitive impairment, attention deficits, executive function, working memory, extraintestinal manifestations, cognitive screening, adults
MeSH terms
Aged, Cognition, Humans, Learning, Inflammatory Bowel Diseases, Executive Function, Cognitive Dysfunction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review