Longitudinal Association Between Generalized Anxiety Disorder and Cognitive Change: A Meta-Analysis.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 PSYCHIATRY
Psychiatry Investigation Pub Date : 2026-05-01 Epub Date: 2026-05-11 DOI:10.30773/pi.2025.0299
Jie Li, Leiyu Shi, Nan Jiang, Benqi Zhao, Yujie Wang, Zhuozhao Zheng
{"title":"Longitudinal Association Between Generalized Anxiety Disorder and Cognitive Change: A Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Jie Li, Leiyu Shi, Nan Jiang, Benqi Zhao, Yujie Wang, Zhuozhao Zheng","doi":"10.30773/pi.2025.0299","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to systematically evaluate the longitudinal relationship between generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and cognitive function changes. Specifically, we examined whether GAD is an independent risk factor for sustained cognitive decline and explored the potential effects of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) on cognitive and emotional outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library for eligible longitudinal studies and randomized controlled trials published up to January 20, 2025. Meta-analyses were performed using RevMan 5.4.1. Effect sizes were estimated using mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals. Heterogeneity was assessed with the I2 statistic. Sensitivity analyses and publication bias assessments were also conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 13 studies were included. The results showed no significant differences between GAD patients and controls on memory and attention subscores of the dementia rating scale (p>0.05). Total error scores also showed no significant difference. Subgroup analyses indicated that GAD patients receiving CBT demonstrated greater improvement in clinical symptoms than those receiving non-cognitive interventions (MD=-4.39, p=0.0004). Beck Depression Inventory score differences were statistically significant, while Penn State Worry Questionnaire score differences were not.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This meta-analysis suggests that while GAD does not show consistent evidence of sustained cognitive decline, CBT may be associated with improvement in emotional symptoms. By integrating longitudinal data with treatment outcomes, this study offers preliminary insights into the potential indirect cognitive benefits of psychotherapy in GAD.</p>","PeriodicalId":21164,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatry Investigation","volume":"23 5","pages":"588-596"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13212003/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychiatry Investigation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30773/pi.2025.0299","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/5/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to systematically evaluate the longitudinal relationship between generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and cognitive function changes. Specifically, we examined whether GAD is an independent risk factor for sustained cognitive decline and explored the potential effects of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) on cognitive and emotional outcomes.

Methods: We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library for eligible longitudinal studies and randomized controlled trials published up to January 20, 2025. Meta-analyses were performed using RevMan 5.4.1. Effect sizes were estimated using mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals. Heterogeneity was assessed with the I2 statistic. Sensitivity analyses and publication bias assessments were also conducted.

Results: A total of 13 studies were included. The results showed no significant differences between GAD patients and controls on memory and attention subscores of the dementia rating scale (p>0.05). Total error scores also showed no significant difference. Subgroup analyses indicated that GAD patients receiving CBT demonstrated greater improvement in clinical symptoms than those receiving non-cognitive interventions (MD=-4.39, p=0.0004). Beck Depression Inventory score differences were statistically significant, while Penn State Worry Questionnaire score differences were not.

Conclusion: This meta-analysis suggests that while GAD does not show consistent evidence of sustained cognitive decline, CBT may be associated with improvement in emotional symptoms. By integrating longitudinal data with treatment outcomes, this study offers preliminary insights into the potential indirect cognitive benefits of psychotherapy in GAD.

广泛性焦虑障碍与认知改变的纵向关联:一项荟萃分析。
目的:本研究旨在系统评价广泛性焦虑障碍(GAD)与认知功能改变的纵向关系。具体来说,我们研究了广泛性焦虑症是否是持续认知能力下降的独立危险因素,并探讨了认知行为疗法(CBT)对认知和情绪结果的潜在影响。方法:我们对PubMed、Embase、Web of Science和Cochrane Library进行了系统检索,以获取截至2025年1月20日发表的符合条件的纵向研究和随机对照试验。meta分析采用RevMan 5.4.1软件。使用平均差异(MD)和95%置信区间估计效应量。采用I2统计量评估异质性。还进行了敏感性分析和发表偏倚评估。结果:共纳入13项研究。结果显示,GAD患者与对照组在痴呆评定量表的记忆和注意力得分上无显著差异(p < 0.05)。总错误评分差异无统计学意义。亚组分析表明,接受CBT治疗的GAD患者的临床症状比接受非认知干预的患者有更大的改善(MD=-4.39, p=0.0004)。贝克抑郁量表得分差异有统计学意义,而宾夕法尼亚州立大学忧虑问卷得分差异无统计学意义。结论:这项荟萃分析表明,尽管广泛性焦虑症没有显示出持续认知能力下降的一致证据,但CBT可能与情绪症状的改善有关。通过将纵向数据与治疗结果相结合,本研究为心理治疗对广泛性焦虑症潜在的间接认知益处提供了初步见解。
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
4.10
自引率
3.70%
发文量
105
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Psychiatry Investigation is published on the 25th day of every month in English by the Korean Neuropsychiatric Association (KNPA). The Journal covers the whole range of psychiatry and neuroscience. Both basic and clinical contributions are encouraged from all disciplines and research areas relevant to the pathophysiology and management of neuropsychiatric disorders and symptoms, as well as researches related to cross cultural psychiatry and ethnic issues in psychiatry. The Journal publishes editorials, review articles, original articles, brief reports, viewpoints and correspondences. All research articles are peer reviewed. Contributions are accepted for publication on the condition that their substance has not been published or submitted for publication elsewhere. Authors submitting papers to the Journal (serially or otherwise) with a common theme or using data derived from the same sample (or a subset thereof) must send details of all relevant previous publications and simultaneous submissions. The Journal is not responsible for statements made by contributors. Material in the Journal does not necessarily reflect the views of the Editor or of the KNPA. Manuscripts accepted for publication are copy-edited to improve readability and to ensure conformity with house style.
×
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
小红书