Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 920

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Predictive Values of Neurocognition and Negative Symptoms on Functional Outcome in Schizophrenia: A Longitudinal First-Episode Study With 7-Year Follow-Up

Milev, Peter, Ho, Beng-Choon, Arndt, Stephan, Andreasen, Nancy C.·2005·American Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The relationship between cognition and outcome in people with schizophrenia has been established in studies that, for the most part, examined chronic patients and were cross-sectional in design. The purpose of this study was to analyze the relationships between neurocognitive variables assessed at illness onset and functional outcome in a longitudinal design. An additional area of interest was whether the severity of negative symptoms would predict outcome independently from neurocognitive variables or whether there would be an overlap in their predictive power. METHOD: The authors administered a comprehensive cognitive battery and clinical assessments to 99 subjects who were in their first episode of illness and analyzed the relationship of cognition and symptom severity at intake with community outcome after an average follow-up period of 7 years. RESULTS: Verbal memory, processing speed and attention, and the severity of negative symptoms at intake were related to subsequent outcome. Global psychosocial functioning was predicted by negative symptoms and attention. Verbal memory was the significant predictor of the degree of impairment in recreational activities. Impairment in relationships was predicted by negative symptoms and memory, whereas attention and negative symptoms were predictive of work performance. There was an overlap in the variance in outcome explained by cognitive variables and negative symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Verbal memory and processing speed and attention are potential targets for psychosocial interventions to improve outcome. Results from cross-sectional or chronic patient studies do not necessarily correspond to the findings of this prospective first-episode study in which cognition appears to explain less of the variance in outcome.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1176/appi.ajp.162.3.495

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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

Cited by

See all 920

Metadata

Authors
Milev, P., Ho, B.-C., Arndt, S., & Andreasen, N. C.
Venue
American Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2005-03-01
Volume
162
Issue
3
Pages
495-506
ISSN
  • 0002-953X (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-7228
OpenAlex
W2161632903
Cited by
920
References
3
FWCI
15.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Predictive Values of Neurocognition and Negative Symptoms on Functional Outcome in Schizophrenia: A Longitudinal First-Episode Study With 7-Year Follow-Up. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1176/appi.ajp.162.3.495
The paper
Milev, P., Ho, B.-C., Arndt, S., & Andreasen, N. C. (2005). Predictive Values of Neurocognition and Negative Symptoms on Functional Outcome in Schizophrenia: A Longitudinal First-Episode Study With 7-Year Follow-Up. American Journal of Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.162.3.495

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.