The DOI matches its Crossref record; 73 of the 73 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Meta-analysis of Cognitive Deficits in Ultra-high Risk to Psychosis and First-Episode Psychosis: Do the Cognitive Deficits Progress Over, or After, the Onset of Psychosis?
Open accessAbstract
Cognitive dysfunction is a well-established feature of schizophrenia, and there is evidence suggesting that cognitive deficits are secondary to abnormal neurodevelopment leading to problems in acquiring such abilities. However, it is not clear whether there is also a decline in cognitive performance over, or after, the onset of psychosis. Our objective was to quantitatively examine the longitudinal changes in cognitive function in patients who presented with first-episode psychosis (FEP), ultra-high risk (UHR) for psychosis, and controls. Electronic databases were searched for the studies published between January 1987 and February 2013. All studies reporting longitudinal cognitive data in FEP and UHR subjects were retrieved. We conducted meta-analyses of 25 studies including 905 patients with FEP, 560 patients at UHR, and 405 healthy controls. The cognitive performances of FEP, UHR, and healthy controls all significantly improved over time. There was no publication bias, and distributions of effect sizes were very homogenous. In FEP, the degree of improvement in verbal working memory and executive functions was significantly associated with reduction in negative symptoms. There was no evidence of cognitive decline in patients with UHR and FEP. In contrast, the cognitive performances of both groups improved at follow-up. These findings suggest that cognitive deficits are already established before the prodromal phases of psychosis. These data support the neurodevelopmental model rather than neurodegenerative and related staging models of schizophrenia.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis
Higgins, J. P. T., & Thompson, S. G. (2002) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1186 · Cited by 36,763
Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology<SUBTITLE>A Proposal for Reporting</SUBTITLE>
Stroup, D. F. (2000) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.283.15.2008 · Cited by 20,623
Neurocognitive deficit in schizophrenia: A quantitative review of the evidence.
Heinrichs, R. W., & Zakzanis, K. K. (1998) · Neuropsychology · doi:10.1037/0894-4105.12.3.426 · Cited by 2,798
The neuropathology of schizophrenia
Harrison, P. J. (1999) · Brain · doi:10.1093/brain/122.4.593 · Cited by 1,677
Schizophrenia: Caused by a fault in programmed synaptic elimination during adolescence?
Feinberg, I. (1982) · Journal of Psychiatric Research · doi:10.1016/0022-3956(82)90038-3 · Cited by 1,395
Pantelis, C., Velakoulis, D., McGorry, P. D., Wood, S. J., Suckling, J., Phillips, L. J., Yung, A. R., Bullmore, E. T., Brewer, W., Soulsby, B., et al. (2003) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(03)12323-9 · Cited by 1,310
Neurocognition in first-episode schizophrenia: a meta-analytic review.
Mesholam-Gately, R. I., Giuliano, A. J., Goff, K. P., Faraone, S. V., & Seidman, L. J. (2009) · Neuropsychology · doi:10.1037/a0014708 · Cited by 1,130
Ho, B.-C., Andreasen, N. C., Ziebell, S., Pierson, R., & Magnotta, V. (2011) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2010.199 · Cited by 971
McGorry, P. D., Hickie, I. B., Yung, A. R., Pantelis, C., & Jackson, H. J. (2006) · Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1080/j.1440-1614.2006.01860.x · Cited by 919
Is schizophrenia a neurodevelopmental disorder?
Murray, R. M., & Lewis, S. W. (1988) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.296.6614.63 · Cited by 908
Self-citation
Cited by
Nonsocial and social cognition in schizophrenia: current evidence and future directions
Green, M. F., Horan, W. P., & Lee, J. (2019) · World Psychiatry · doi:10.1002/wps.20624 · Cited by 612
Prevention of Psychosis: Advances in Detection, Prognosis, and Intervention
Fusar-Poli, P., Salazar de Pablo, G., Correll, C. U., Meyer-Lindenberg, A., Millan, M. J., Borgwardt, S., Galderisi, S., Bechdolf, A., Pfennig, A., Kessing, L. V., et al. (2020) · JAMA Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2019.4779 · Cited by 476
Transdiagnostic impairment of cognitive control in mental illness
McTeague, L. M., Goodkind, M. S., & Etkin, A. (2016) · Journal of Psychiatric Research · doi:10.1016/j.jpsychires.2016.08.001 · Cited by 368
The C factor: cognitive dysfunction as a transdiagnostic dimension in psychopathology
Abramovitch, A., Short, T., & Schweiger, A. (2021) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2021.102007 · Cited by 269
Meta-analysis of cognitive performance in drug-naïve patients with schizophrenia
Fatouros-Bergman, H., Cervenka, S., Flyckt, L., Edman, G., & Farde, L. (2014) · Schizophrenia Research · doi:10.1016/j.schres.2014.06.034 · Cited by 273
Metadata
- Authors
- Bora, E., & Murray, R. M.
- Venue
- Schizophrenia Bulletin
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2013-06-14
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 744-755
- ISSN
- 0586-7614 (ISSN-L)
- 1745-1701
- OpenAlex
- W2122636740
- Cited by
- 507
- References
- 73
- FWCI
- 4.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Meta-analysis of Cognitive Deficits in Ultra-high Risk to Psychosis and First-Episode Psychosis: Do the Cognitive Deficits Progress Over, or After, the Onset of Psychosis? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/schbul/sbt085
- The paper
- Bora, E., & Murray, R. M. (2014). Meta-analysis of Cognitive Deficits in Ultra-high Risk to Psychosis and First-Episode Psychosis: Do the Cognitive Deficits Progress Over, or After, the Onset of Psychosis? Schizophrenia Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbt085
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
