Cited by 472Schizophrenia research and treatmentMental Health and PsychiatryPsychological Testing and Assessment

Baseline Neurocognitive Deficits in the CATIE Schizophrenia Trial

Keefe, Richard S E, Bilder, Robert M, Harvey, Philip D, Davis, Sonia M, Palmer, Barton W, Gold, James M, Meltzer, Herbert Y, Green, Michael F +11 more·2006·Neuropsychopharmacology

Abstract

Neurocognition is moderately to severely impaired in patients with schizophrenia. However, the factor structure of the various neurocognitive deficits, the relationship with symptoms and other variables, and the minimum amount of testing required to determine an adequate composite score has not been determined in typical patients with schizophrenia. An 'all-comer' approach to cognition is needed, as provided by the baseline assessment of an unprecedented number of patients in the CATIE (Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness) schizophrenia trial. From academic sites and treatment providers representative of the community, 1493 patients with chronic schizophrenia were entered into the study, including those with medical comorbidity and substance abuse. Eleven neurocognitive tests were administered, resulting in 24 individual scores reduced to nine neurocognitive outcome measures, five domain scores and a composite score. Despite minimal screening procedures, 91.2% of patients provided meaningful neurocognitive data. Exploratory principal components analysis yielded one factor accounting for 45% of the test variance. Confirmatory factor analysis showed that a single-factor model comprised of five domain scores was the best fit. The correlations among the factors were medium to high, and scores on individual factors were very highly correlated with the single composite score. Neurocognitive deficits were modestly correlated with negative symptom severity (r=0.13-0.27), but correlations with positive symptom severity were near zero (r<0.08). Even in an 'all-comer' clinical trial, neurocognitive deficits can be assessed in the overwhelming majority of patients, and the severity of impairment is similar to meta-analytic estimates. Multiple analyses suggested that a broad cognitive deficit characterizes this sample. These deficits are modestly related to negative symptoms and essentially independent of positive symptom severity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/sj.npp.1301072

Cites

61 of 61 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?

  • The larger the study of the factorial structure of cognitive performance, the more likely it is that a single, global ability factor arises from factor analyses.

    “The larger the study of the factorial structure of cognitive performance, the more likely it is that a single, global ability factor arises from factor analyses. 66 - 67”

    From Domains of cognition and their assessment (2019) · cites this paper as [67]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Keefe, R. S. E., Bilder, R. M., Harvey, P. D., Davis, S. M., Palmer, B. W., Gold, J. M., Meltzer, H. Y., Green, M. F., Miller, D. D., Canive, J. M., Adler, L. W., Manschreck, T. C., Swartz, M., Rosenheck, R., Perkins, D. O., Walker, T. M., Stroup, T. S., McEvoy, J. P., & Lieberman, J. A.
Affiliations
  • Duke University (US)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
  • University of California San Diego (US)
  • Vanderbilt University Medical Center (US)
  • University of Iowa (US)
  • Clinical Insights (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Duke Medical Center (US)
  • Yale University (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • New York State Psychiatric Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Keefe, Richard S E
Venue
Neuropsychopharmacology
Published
2006-04-19
Volume
31
Issue
9
Pages
2033-2046
ISSN
  • 0893-133X (ISSN-L)
  • 1740-634X
OpenAlex
W1975586101
Cited by
472
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 28 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 31 · 2014: 33 · 2013: 32 · 2012: 34
FWCI
24.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neuropsychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
Keywords
schizophrenia, neurocognitive impairment, CATIE trial, negative symptoms, positive symptoms, chronic schizophrenia, cognitive screening, substance abuse, comorbidities
MeSH terms
Adult, Cognition Disorders, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Memory, Neuropsychological Tests, Psychomotor Performance, Schizophrenic Psychology

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