Cited by 321Schizophrenia research and treatmentNeural dynamics and brain functionNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Mismatch negativity potentials and cognitive impairment in schizophrenia

Baldeweg, Torsten, Klugman, Anthony, Gruzelier, John, Hirsch, Steven R·2004·Schizophrenia Research

Abstract

Cognitive impairment in schizophrenia is an important predictor of clinical and social outcome. In this preliminary study, the correlation between cognitive status and deficits in mismatch negativity (MMN) generation was explored. The MMN response to tone duration deviants was recorded using a new stimulation protocol with continuously changing ('roving') standard stimuli in order to measure the effect of standard repetitions on MMN (memory trace effect). Cognitive status of the patient group (n=28) was assessed using neuropsychological screening. Healthy participants (n=20) served as age-matched comparison group. In patients, MMN amplitude in frontal electrodes as well as the MMN memory trace effect was diminished compared to controls. While both measures were inversely related to patient's age and disease severity, only the MMN memory trace effect was robustly correlated with the degree of neuropsychological impairment. This suggests that ERP measures of auditory system adaptability more appropriately characterise the pathophysiological processes underlying cognitive impairment in schizophrenia than static measures of ERP magnitude.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.schres.2003.09.009

Cites

65 of 65 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • In the roving oddball paradigm, repetition showed no effect on MMN for patients with schizophrenia.

    “They found that healthy controls showed larger MMN amplitudes under longer repetition conditions, while repetition showed no effect on MMN for patients with schizophrenia.”
  • In the roving oddball paradigm, healthy controls showed larger MMN amplitudes under longer repetition conditions.

    “They found that healthy controls showed larger MMN amplitudes under longer repetition conditions, while repetition showed no effect on MMN for patients with schizophrenia.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Baldeweg, T., Klugman, A., Gruzelier, J., & Hirsch, S. R.
Affiliations
  • Great Ormond Street Hospital (GB)
  • Charing Cross Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
Baldeweg, Torsten
Venue
Schizophrenia Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2004-08
Volume
69
Issue
2-3
Pages
203-217
ISSN
0920-9964 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2142009972
Cited by
321
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 14
FWCI
2.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Schizophrenia Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
mismatch negativity, schizophrenia
MeSH terms
Acoustic Stimulation, Adult, Brain Mapping, Cognition, Cognition Disorders, Contingent Negative Variation, Electroencephalography, Electrooculography, Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Female, Humans, Male, Memory, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Schizophrenia, Case-Control Studies

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