BACKGROUND: Cognitive dysfunction is a core feature of psychotic disorders; however, substantial variability exists both within and between subjects in terms of cognitive domains of dysfunction, and a clear 'profile' of cognitive strengths and weaknesses characteristic of any diagnosis or psychosis as a whole has not emerged. Cluster analysis provides an opportunity to group individuals using a data-driven approach rather than predetermined grouping criteria. While several studies have identified meaningful cognitive clusters in schizophrenia, no study to date has examined cognition in a cross-diagnostic sample of patients with psychotic disorders using a cluster approach. We aimed to examine cognitive variables in a sample of 167 patients with psychosis using cluster methods. METHOD: Subjects with schizophrenia (n = 41), schizo-affective disorder (n = 53) or bipolar disorder with psychosis (n = 73) were assessed using a battery of cognitive and clinical measures. Cognitive data were analysed using Ward's method, followed by a K-means cluster approach. Clusters were then compared on diagnosis and measures of clinical symptoms, demographic variables and community functioning. RESULTS: A four-cluster solution was selected, including a 'neuropsychologically normal' cluster, a globally and significantly impaired cluster, and two clusters of mixed cognitive profiles. Clusters differed on several clinical variables; diagnoses were distributed amongst all clusters, although not evenly. CONCLUSIONS: Identification of groups of patients who share similar neurocognitive profiles may help pinpoint relevant neural abnormalities underlying these traits. Such groupings may also hasten the development of individualized treatment approaches, including cognitive remediation tailored to patients' specific cognitive profiles.
BACKGROUND:Cognitive dysfunction is a core feature of psychotic disorders; however, substantial variability exists both within and between subjects in terms of cognitive domains of dysfunction, and a clear 'profile' of cognitive strengths and weaknesses characteristic of any diagnosis or psychosis as a whole has not emerged. Cluster analysis provides an opportunity to group individuals using a data-driven approach rather than predetermined grouping criteria. While several studies have identified meaningful cognitive clusters in schizophrenia, no study to date has examined cognition in a cross-diagnostic sample of patients with psychotic disorders using a cluster approach. We aimed to examine cognitive variables in a sample of 167 patients with psychosis using cluster methods. METHOD: Subjects with schizophrenia (n = 41), schizo-affective disorder (n = 53) or bipolar disorder with psychosis (n = 73) were assessed using a battery of cognitive and clinical measures. Cognitive data were analysed using Ward's method, followed by a K-means cluster approach. Clusters were then compared on diagnosis and measures of clinical symptoms, demographic variables and community functioning. RESULTS: A four-cluster solution was selected, including a 'neuropsychologically normal' cluster, a globally and significantly impaired cluster, and two clusters of mixed cognitive profiles. Clusters differed on several clinical variables; diagnoses were distributed amongst all clusters, although not evenly. CONCLUSIONS: Identification of groups of patients who share similar neurocognitive profiles may help pinpoint relevant neural abnormalities underlying these traits. Such groupings may also hasten the development of individualized treatment approaches, including cognitive remediation tailored to patients' specific cognitive profiles.
Authors: Mei-Hua Hall; Jordan W Smoller; Nancy R Cook; Katja Schulze; Phil Hyoun Lee; Grantley Taylor; Elvira Bramon; Michael J Coleman; Robin M Murray; Dean F Salisbury; Deborah L Levy Journal: Psychiatry Res Date: 2012-08-24 Impact factor: 3.222
Authors: Faith M Hanlon; Ronald A Yeo; Nicholas A Shaff; Christopher J Wertz; Andrew B Dodd; Juan R Bustillo; Shannon F Stromberg; Denise S Lin; Swala Abrams; Jingyu Liu; Andrew R Mayer Journal: Schizophr Res Date: 2019-01-31 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Antonia N Kaczkurkin; Aristeidis Sotiras; Erica B Baller; Ran Barzilay; Monica E Calkins; Ganesh B Chand; Zaixu Cui; Guray Erus; Yong Fan; Raquel E Gur; Ruben C Gur; Tyler M Moore; David R Roalf; Adon F G Rosen; Kosha Ruparel; Russell T Shinohara; Erdem Varol; Daniel H Wolf; Christos Davatzikos; Theodore D Satterthwaite Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2019-09-18 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Dwight Dickinson; Danielle N Pratt; Evan J Giangrande; MeiLin Grunnagle; Jennifer Orel; Daniel R Weinberger; Joseph H Callicott; Karen F Berman Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2018-01-13 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: Dov B Lerman-Sinkoff; Sridhar Kandala; Vince D Calhoun; Deanna M Barch; Daniel T Mamah Journal: Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging Date: 2019-05-20
Authors: M Russo; T E Van Rheenen; M Shanahan; K Mahon; M M Perez-Rodriguez; A Cuesta-Diaz; E Larsen; A K Malhotra; K E Burdick Journal: Psychol Med Date: 2017-06-07 Impact factor: 7.723
Authors: Kathryn E Lewandowski; Julie M McCarthy; Dost Öngür; Lesley A Norris; Geoffrey Z Liu; Richard J Juelich; Justin T Baker Journal: Schizophr Res Date: 2018-08-17 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Julia M Sheffield; Sridhar Kandala; Carol A Tamminga; Godfrey D Pearlson; Matcheri S Keshavan; John A Sweeney; Brett A Clementz; Dov B Lerman-Sinkoff; S Kristian Hill; Deanna M Barch Journal: JAMA Psychiatry Date: 2017-06-01 Impact factor: 21.596
Authors: Katherine A Grisanzio; Andrea N Goldstein-Piekarski; Michelle Yuyun Wang; Abdullah P Rashed Ahmed; Zoe Samara; Leanne M Williams Journal: JAMA Psychiatry Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 21.596