| Literature DB >> 23986723 |
Mitja Bodatsch1, Joachim Klosterkötter, Ralf Müller, Stephan Ruhrmann.
Abstract
The basic symptoms (BS) approach provides a valid instrument in predicting psychosis onset and represents moreover a significant heuristic framework for research. The term "basic symptoms" denotes subtle changes of cognition and perception in the earliest and prodromal stages of psychosis development. BS are thought to correspond to disturbances of neural information processing. Following the heuristic implications of the BS approach, the present paper aims at exploring disturbances of information processing, revealed by functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and electro-encephalographic as characteristics of the at-risk state of psychosis. Furthermore, since high-risk studies employing ultra-high-risk criteria revealed non-conversion rates commonly exceeding 50%, thus warranting approaches that increase specificity, the potential contribution of neural information processing disturbances to psychosis prediction is reviewed. In summary, the at-risk state seems to be associated with information processing disturbances. Moreover, fMRI investigations suggested that disturbances of language processing domains might be a characteristic of the prodromal state. Neurophysiological studies revealed that disturbances of sensory processing may assist psychosis prediction in allowing for a quantification of risk in terms of magnitude and time. The latter finding represents a significant advancement since an estimation of the time to event has not yet been achieved by clinical approaches. Some evidence suggests a close relationship between self-experienced BS and neural information processing. With regard to future research, the relationship between neural information processing disturbances and different clinical risk concepts warrants further investigations. Thereby, a possible time sequence in the prodromal phase might be of particular interest.Entities:
Keywords: EEG/ERP; basic symptoms; fMRI; prediction of psychosis; ultra-high risk
Year: 2013 PMID: 23986723 PMCID: PMC3750943 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2013.00093
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychiatry ISSN: 1664-0640 Impact factor: 4.157
Predictive basic symptoms.
| Symptom | Description | Phenomenology |
|---|---|---|
| Thought interference | Intrusion of completely insignificant thoughts hindering concentration | “I can’t help thinking about other things, which is very distracting” |
| Thought perseveration | Obsessive like repetition of insignificant thoughts or mental images | “I always have to mull over what I just said. I can’t stop thinking about what I might have said wrong or what I could have added although I really don’t think that anything was wrong with what I said” |
| Thought pressure | Self-reported “chaos” of unrelated thoughts | “If I am stressed out my mind gets chaotic and I have great problems thinking straight. Too many thoughts come up at once” |
| Thought blockages | Sudden loss of the thread or train of thoughts | “Sometimes my thoughts just stop, are suddenly gone, like being cut off” |
| Disturbance of receptive language | Paralysis in the immediate comprehension of simple words/sentences, either read or heard | “I often can’t get the meaning of common words when I am reading” |
| Disturbance of expressive speech | Problems in producing appropriate words, sometimes experienced as a reduction in active vocabulary | “Sometimes I think it must appear as if English were really my second language, like I don’t know English very well because I have difficulties expressing myself. I forget the words” |
| Disturbances of abstract thinking | Inability to explain abstract contexts, sayings, or idioms | “Sometimes I get puzzled if a certain object or event only stands as a metaphor for some more general, abstract, or philosophical meaning” |
| Inability to divide attention | Interference of two non-demanding tasks on different sensual domains (e.g., verbal dialogue and motor action) | “Doing two things at once has become impossible even with the simplest things. I always have to concentrate on one thing at a time” |
| Captivation of attention | Involuntary captivation by details of the visual field that catches and holds the look. | “Sometimes an object really seems to stand out from the rest of what I see. My eyes then fix on it. It’s like being spellbound” |
| Decreased ability to discriminate between perception and ideas | The ability to allocate mental representations to their proper domain, e.g., to discriminate memory and fantasy | “I thought about my grandparents. Then a weird thing happened: I couldn’t remember if I knew my grandparents properly, if they were real, or if they were just in my imagination” |
| Unstable ideas of reference | Feelings of being directly addressed by a non-intentional environment with insight | “When I was listening to the radio the idea that the lyrics had some special meaning for me suddenly popped up into my head” |
| Derealization | Feelings of being detached from an “unreal” environment | “Sometimes, I feel disconnected from the world around me, like I’m under a glass cover” |
| Visual or acoustic perceptual disturbances | Perceptual observations, e.g., a wrong coloring, distorted shape, or changed sound quality/intensity with insight | “People suddenly seemed changed and had different hair colors” |
Adapted from Schultze-Lutter (.
Event-related potentials and prepulse inhibition in converters and non-converters.
| Study | Parameter | Mean time to transition (months ± SD) | Predictive model reported | ARMS-T vs. ARMS-NT | Diagnoses after transition | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ziermans et al. ( | PPI | 42 (6) | Not reported | No | ↓ | Schizophrenia ( |
| Brockhaus-Dumke et al. ( | Sensory gating | 39 (21) | Not reported | No | ↔ | Schizophrenia ( |
| Hsieh et al. ( | Sensory gating MMN | 67 (11) | Not reported | No | ↔ | Not reported |
| van Tricht et al. ( | Sensory gating | 61 (18) | Not reported | No | ↓ | Schizophrenia ( |
| Bodatsch et al. ( | MMN amplitude | 62 (25) | 7.0 ± 7.0 | Yes | ↓ | Schizophrenia ( |
| Shaikh et al. ( | MMN amplitude | 41 (10) | 26.5 ± 26.6 | No | ↓ | Schizophreniform disorder ( |
| Higuchi et al. ( | MMN amplitude | 17 (4) | Not reported | No | ↓ | Schizophrenia |
| van Tricht et al. ( | P300 amplitude | 61 (18) | 9.4 ± 7.2 | Yes | ↓ | Not reported |
| Fusar-Poli et al. ( | P300 amplitude | 39 (10) | Not reported | No | ↔ | Not reported |
PPI, prepulse inhibition; MMN, mismatch negativity; ARMS-T/-NT, at-risk mental state-transition/non-transition.
The arrows pointing downwards indicate a deficit in converters (independent of polarity of the respective ERP).