An Evaluation of Metacognitive Functions in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder.

IF 1 4区 医学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Noropsikiyatri Arsivi-Archives of Neuropsychiatry Pub Date : 2025-02-10 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.29399/npa.28707
İlker Güneysu, Esma Akpınar Aslan, Sedat Batmaz, Seda Güneysu
{"title":"An Evaluation of Metacognitive Functions in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder.","authors":"İlker Güneysu, Esma Akpınar Aslan, Sedat Batmaz, Seda Güneysu","doi":"10.29399/npa.28707","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>In metacognitive theory, thought fusion beliefs, beliefs about rituals, and beliefs about stop signals predict obsessive-compulsive symptoms. The number of controlled studies using specific scales to assess these three belief domains in different cultures is limited.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The comparison sample consisted of patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder (n: 106) and control (n: 200) group. Participants filled out the Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory-Revised form, Penn State Worry Scale, Obsessive Beliefs Scale-44, Thought Fusion Inventory, Beliefs about Rituals Inventory and Stop Signs Questionnaire. Correlation analysis of worry and OCD symptom severity levels, cognitions and metacognitions in OCD were performed between groups. Worry, cognition and metacognitive predictors of obsessive-compulsive symptoms were analyzed with a hierarchical linear regression model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The metacognitive scale scores were significantly higher in the OCD group than in the control group except for hoarding (p<0.001). Obsessive-compulsive symptoms were statistically positively correlated (r: 0.17-0.53) with all three metacognitive functions in the OCD and control groups (except ordering in the control group). In addition to the three metacognitive domains, worry, perfectionism and intolerance of uncertainty predicted obsessive-compulsive symptoms (p<0.05). All three metacognitive domains contributed to the variance in the hierarchical regression model in addition to worry and cognitions (p<0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>All the three metacognitive domains were correlated with OCD symptom severity. Metacognitions explained additional variance above and beyond cognitions. Metacognitive assessment domains of OCD predicted OCD symptom severity when included in the hierarchical regression model.</p>","PeriodicalId":51142,"journal":{"name":"Noropsikiyatri Arsivi-Archives of Neuropsychiatry","volume":"62 1","pages":"62-68"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11877376/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Noropsikiyatri Arsivi-Archives of Neuropsychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29399/npa.28707","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: In metacognitive theory, thought fusion beliefs, beliefs about rituals, and beliefs about stop signals predict obsessive-compulsive symptoms. The number of controlled studies using specific scales to assess these three belief domains in different cultures is limited.

Methods: The comparison sample consisted of patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder (n: 106) and control (n: 200) group. Participants filled out the Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory-Revised form, Penn State Worry Scale, Obsessive Beliefs Scale-44, Thought Fusion Inventory, Beliefs about Rituals Inventory and Stop Signs Questionnaire. Correlation analysis of worry and OCD symptom severity levels, cognitions and metacognitions in OCD were performed between groups. Worry, cognition and metacognitive predictors of obsessive-compulsive symptoms were analyzed with a hierarchical linear regression model.

Results: The metacognitive scale scores were significantly higher in the OCD group than in the control group except for hoarding (p<0.001). Obsessive-compulsive symptoms were statistically positively correlated (r: 0.17-0.53) with all three metacognitive functions in the OCD and control groups (except ordering in the control group). In addition to the three metacognitive domains, worry, perfectionism and intolerance of uncertainty predicted obsessive-compulsive symptoms (p<0.05). All three metacognitive domains contributed to the variance in the hierarchical regression model in addition to worry and cognitions (p<0.05).

Conclusion: All the three metacognitive domains were correlated with OCD symptom severity. Metacognitions explained additional variance above and beyond cognitions. Metacognitive assessment domains of OCD predicted OCD symptom severity when included in the hierarchical regression model.

评估强迫症患者的元认知功能。
在元认知理论中,思想融合信念、关于仪式的信念和关于停止信号的信念可以预测强迫症症状。在不同文化中,使用特定量表来评估这三个信念域的对照研究数量有限。方法:将强迫症患者(106例)与对照组(200例)进行比较。被试填写了强迫性量表修正表、宾夕法尼亚州立大学焦虑量表、强迫性信念量表44、思想融合量表、仪式信念量表和停止标志问卷。对焦虑与强迫症症状严重程度、强迫症认知和元认知进行相关性分析。采用层次线性回归模型分析强迫症症状的焦虑、认知和元认知预测因子。结果:除囤积癖外,强迫症组元认知量表得分均显著高于对照组(p)。结论:三个元认知域均与强迫症症状严重程度相关。元认知解释了认知之外的额外差异。纳入层次回归模型后,强迫症元认知评估域预测强迫症症状严重程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
9.10%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Archives of Neuropsychiatry (Arch Neuropsychiatry) is the official journal of the Turkish Neuropsychiatric Society. It is published quarterly, and four editions annually constitute a volume. Archives of Neuropsychiatry is a peer reviewed scientific journal that publishes articles on psychiatry, neurology, and behavioural sciences. Both clinical and basic science contributions are welcomed. Submissions that address topics in the interface of neurology and psychiatry are encouraged. The content covers original research articles, reviews, letters to the editor, and case reports.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信