Cited by 165Bipolar Disorder and TreatmentSchizophrenia research and treatmentDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research

Cognitive impairment in bipolar disorder and schizophrenia: a systematic review

Open access
Vöhringer, Paul A., Barroilhet, Sergio A., Amerio, Andrea, Reale, Maria Laura, Alvear, Katherine, Vergne, Derick, Ghaemi, S. Nassir·2013·Frontiers in Psychiatry

Abstract

AIMS: Previous comparisons of cognitive decline among patients with bipolar disorder (BD) and schizophrenia (SZ) have found somehow quite similar profiles of deficits, but results have varied between studies. Therefore an extensive and thoughtful systematic review of the matter is warranted. METHODS: Studies were found through systematic search (PubMed) following PRISMA guidelines. To be included, studies must have assessed the following cognitive functions: executive functions, memory, IQ, attention-concentration, and perceptuomotor function. In order to make comparison between the two entities, studies should include BD patients with operationally defined euthymia, schizophrenic patients in remission, and third group of healthy control patients. Comparisons were made after controlling for years of schooling and residual affective symptoms. RESULTS: We found that overall both SZ and BD patients present deficits on all neurocognitive measures compared to healthy controls. In particular, SZ patients show more severe and pervasive cognitive deficits while BD patients present a milder and more confined impairment. In addition, evidence from the literature suggests that SZ and BD patients share a similar cognitive impairment profile with different degrees of deficits. Therefore, the difference between the two groups seems to be more quantitative (degree of deficit) rather than qualitative (profile), supporting a dimensional approach to the two clinical entities. Limitations of the present review includes the impossibility to control for effects of medication, varying time required for assessment across studies, illness diagnosis reliability, and course severity. CONCLUSION: Patients with BD might exhibit a cognitive impairment that could be similar to SZ in terms of their profile, although patients with SZ may have more severe and widespread impairments.

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 · 10.3389/fpsyt.2013.00087

Cites

50 of 50 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?

  • The similarity of non-social prediction ability in BD to HC is consistent with previous literature reporting non-significant differences in cognitive performance between BD and HC.

    “consistent with previous literature reporting non-significant dif­ ferences in cognitive performance between BD and HC (V ¨ ohringer et al., 2013).”

    From Predictive coding in neuropsychiatric disorders: a systematic transdiagnostic review. (2025) · cites this paper as Vöhringer et al., 2013

    The Results table reports no significant BD–HC differences on some measures, including executive functioning in Joshua et al. and most neurocognitive subscores in the non-psychotic BD subgroup in Simonsen et al. But the Results summary says BD patients showed deficits on almost all neurocognitive measures compared with healthy controls, with only a few exceptions. The citation therefore supports similarity on particular measures or in particular samples, not a general absence of cognitive-performance differences. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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
Vöhringer, P. A., Barroilhet, S. A., Amerio, A., Reale, M. L., Alvear, K., Vergne, D., & Ghaemi, S. N.
Affiliations
  • Tufts Medical Center (US)
  • University of Parma (IT)
  • Universidad Diego Portales (CL)
Corresponding author
Vöhringer, Paul A.
Venue
Frontiers in Psychiatry
Published
2013
Volume
4
Pages
87-87
ISSN
1664-0640 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2078481226
Cited by
165
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 2
FWCI
2.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • CINECA IRIS Institutial Research Information System (University of Genoa) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Bipolar Disorder and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Keywords
cognitive impairment, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, executive function, memory, attention, IQ, euthymic bipolar patients, remitted schizophrenia, dimensional approach, neurocognitive impairment

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