Investigating the relationship between specific negative symptoms and metacognitive functioning in psychosis: A systematic review

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY
Nicola McGuire, Andrew Gumley, Ilanit Hasson-Ohayon, Stephanie Allan, Warut Aunjitsakul, Orkun Aydin, Sune Bo, Kelsey A. Bonfils, Anna-Lena Bröcker, Steven de Jong, Giancarlo Dimaggio, Felix Inchausti, Jens Einar Jansen, Tania Lecomte, Lauren Luther, Angus MacBeth, Christiane Montag, Marlene Buch Pedersen, Gerdina Henrika Maria Pijnenborg, Raffaele Popolo, Matthias Schwannauer, Anne-Marie Trauelsen, Rozanne van Donkersgoed, Weiming Wu, Kai Wang, Paul H. Lysaker, Hamish McLeod
{"title":"Investigating the relationship between specific negative symptoms and metacognitive functioning in psychosis: A systematic review","authors":"Nicola McGuire,&nbsp;Andrew Gumley,&nbsp;Ilanit Hasson-Ohayon,&nbsp;Stephanie Allan,&nbsp;Warut Aunjitsakul,&nbsp;Orkun Aydin,&nbsp;Sune Bo,&nbsp;Kelsey A. Bonfils,&nbsp;Anna-Lena Bröcker,&nbsp;Steven de Jong,&nbsp;Giancarlo Dimaggio,&nbsp;Felix Inchausti,&nbsp;Jens Einar Jansen,&nbsp;Tania Lecomte,&nbsp;Lauren Luther,&nbsp;Angus MacBeth,&nbsp;Christiane Montag,&nbsp;Marlene Buch Pedersen,&nbsp;Gerdina Henrika Maria Pijnenborg,&nbsp;Raffaele Popolo,&nbsp;Matthias Schwannauer,&nbsp;Anne-Marie Trauelsen,&nbsp;Rozanne van Donkersgoed,&nbsp;Weiming Wu,&nbsp;Kai Wang,&nbsp;Paul H. Lysaker,&nbsp;Hamish McLeod","doi":"10.1111/papt.12505","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Disrupted metacognition is implicated in development and maintenance of negative symptoms, but more fine-grained analyses would inform precise treatment targeting for individual negative symptoms.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aims</h3>\n \n <p>This systematic review identifies and examines datasets that test whether specific metacognitive capacities distinctly influence negative symptoms.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Materials &amp; Methods</h3>\n \n <p>PsycINFO, EMBASE, Medline and Cochrane Library databases plus hand searching of relevant articles, journals and grey literature identified quantitative research investigating negative symptoms and metacognition in adults aged 16+ with psychosis. Authors of included articles were contacted to identify unique datasets and missing information. Data were extracted for a risk of bias assessment using the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>85 published reports met criteria and are estimated to reflect 32 distinct datasets and 1623 unique participants. The data indicated uncertainty about the relationship between summed scores of negative symptoms and domains of metacognition, with significant findings indicating correlation coefficients from 0.88 to −0.23. Only eight studies investigated the relationship between metacognition and individual negative symptoms, with mixed findings. Studies were mostly moderate-to-low risk of bias.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Discussion</h3>\n \n <p>The relationship between negative symptoms and metacognition is rarely the focus of studies reviewed here, and negative symptom scores are often summed. This approach may obscure relationships between metacognitive domains and individual negative symptoms which may be important for understanding how negative symptoms are developed and maintained.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conlclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Methodological challenges around overlapping participants, variation in aggregation of negative symptom items and types of analyses used, make a strong case for use of Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis to further elucidate these relationships.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":54539,"journal":{"name":"Psychology and Psychotherapy-Theory Research and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/papt.12505","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology and Psychotherapy-Theory Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/papt.12505","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Disrupted metacognition is implicated in development and maintenance of negative symptoms, but more fine-grained analyses would inform precise treatment targeting for individual negative symptoms.

Aims

This systematic review identifies and examines datasets that test whether specific metacognitive capacities distinctly influence negative symptoms.

Materials & Methods

PsycINFO, EMBASE, Medline and Cochrane Library databases plus hand searching of relevant articles, journals and grey literature identified quantitative research investigating negative symptoms and metacognition in adults aged 16+ with psychosis. Authors of included articles were contacted to identify unique datasets and missing information. Data were extracted for a risk of bias assessment using the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool.

Results

85 published reports met criteria and are estimated to reflect 32 distinct datasets and 1623 unique participants. The data indicated uncertainty about the relationship between summed scores of negative symptoms and domains of metacognition, with significant findings indicating correlation coefficients from 0.88 to −0.23. Only eight studies investigated the relationship between metacognition and individual negative symptoms, with mixed findings. Studies were mostly moderate-to-low risk of bias.

Discussion

The relationship between negative symptoms and metacognition is rarely the focus of studies reviewed here, and negative symptom scores are often summed. This approach may obscure relationships between metacognitive domains and individual negative symptoms which may be important for understanding how negative symptoms are developed and maintained.

Conlclusion

Methodological challenges around overlapping participants, variation in aggregation of negative symptom items and types of analyses used, make a strong case for use of Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis to further elucidate these relationships.

Abstract Image

研究精神病患者的特定负面症状与元认知功能之间的关系:一项系统综述。
背景:破坏的元认知与负面症状的发展和维持有关,但更精细的分析将为针对个人负面症状的精确治疗提供信息。目的:本系统综述确定并检查了测试特定元认知能力是否显著影响负面症状的数据集。材料与方法:PsycINFO、EMBASE、Medline和Cochrane图书馆数据库,加上对相关文章、期刊和灰色文献的手工搜索,确定了调查16岁以上精神病成年人负面症状和元认知的定量研究。我们联系了收录文章的作者,以确定独特的数据集和缺失的信息。使用预后研究质量工具提取偏倚风险评估数据。结果:85份已发表的报告符合标准,估计反映了32个不同的数据集和1623名独特的参与者。数据表明,负面症状总分与元认知领域之间的关系存在不确定性,显著结果表明相关系数在0.88至-0.23之间。只有八项研究调查了元认知与个人负面症状之间的关系,结果喜忧参半。研究大多为中度至低度偏倚风险。讨论:负面症状和元认知之间的关系很少是本文综述的研究重点,负面症状得分经常被总结。这种方法可能会混淆元认知领域和个人负面症状之间的关系,这对于理解负面症状是如何发展和维持的可能很重要。结论:围绕重叠参与者、负面症状项目聚合的变化和所用分析类型的方法学挑战,有力地证明了使用个体参与者数据元分析来进一步阐明这些关系。
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
6.10
自引率
5.90%
发文量
68
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory Research and Practice (formerly The British Journal of Medical Psychology) is an international scientific journal with a focus on the psychological and social processes that underlie the development and improvement of psychological problems and mental wellbeing, including: theoretical and research development in the understanding of cognitive and emotional factors in psychological problems; behaviour and relationships; vulnerability to, adjustment to, assessment of, and recovery (assisted or otherwise) from psychological distresses; psychological therapies with a focus on understanding the processes which affect outcomes where mental health is concerned.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信