This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

57/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100. Mild cognitive impairment

Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment

Plain-language summary

Social cognitive impairments are consistently reported in schizophrenia and are associated with functional outcome. We currently know very little about whether these impairments are stable over the course of illness. In the current study, 3 different aspects of social cognition were assessed (emotion processing, Theory of Mind [ToM], and social relationship perception) at 3 distinct developmental phases of illness: prodromal, first episode, and chronic. In this cross-sectional study, participants included 50 individuals with the prodromal risk syndrome for psychosis and 34 demographically comparable controls, 81 first-episode schizophrenia patients and 46 demographically comparable controls, and 53 chronic schizophrenia patients and 47 demographically comparable controls. Outcome measures included total and subtest scores on 3 specialized measures of social cognition: (1) emotion processing assessed with the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test, (2) ToM assessed with The Awareness of Social Inference Test, and (3) social relationship perception assessed the Relationships Across Domains Test. Social cognitive performance was impaired across all domains of social cognition and in all clinical samples. Group differences in performance were comparable across phase of illness, with no evidence of progression or improvement. Age had no significant effect on performance for either the clinical or the comparison groups. The findings suggest that social cognition in these 3 domains fits a stable pattern that has outcome and treatment implications. An accompanying article prospectively examines the longitudinal stability of social cognition and prediction of functional outcome in the first-episode sample.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Green, M. F., Bearden, C. E., Cannon, T. D., Fiske, A. P., Hellemann, G., Horan, W. P., et al. (2011). Social Cognition in Schizophrenia, Part 1: Performance Across Phase of Illness. Schizophrenia Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbq171

Vancouver

Green MF, Bearden CE, Cannon TD, Fiske AP, Hellemann G, Horan WP, et al. Social Cognition in Schizophrenia, Part 1: Performance Across Phase of Illness. Schizophrenia Bulletin. 2011. doi:10.1093/schbul/sbq171. PMID: 21345917.

BibTeX

@article{green2011-21345917,
  author  = {Green, Michael Foster and Bearden, Carrie E. and Cannon, Tyrone D. and Fiske, Alan Page and Hellemann, Gerhard and Horan, William P. and Kee, Kimmy S. and Kern, Robert S and others},
  title   = {{Social Cognition in Schizophrenia, Part 1: Performance Across Phase of Illness}},
  journal = {Schizophrenia Bulletin},
  year    = {2011},
  doi     = {10.1093/schbul/sbq171},
  pmid    = {21345917},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbq171}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

How to read this study

Design: this is a cross-sectional study. Everyone is measured once, so it cannot show which came first. Read it as a snapshot of how two things go together at one moment.
Size: the record lists 50 participants. Ask whether that is enough for the question, and who they were.
Effect: the record gives no effect size, so the summary above cannot say how large any difference was.

What the evidence grade means here

This page is graded moderate. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. Moderate means the abstract mentions a cohort, case-control or longitudinal design. It can add at most 5 of the 100 points in the study score, and it is a label about design, not a verdict on whether the findings are true.

New to reading papers? Six questions to ask of any Alzheimer’s study · how we score.

Key findings

Social cognitive impairments are consistently reported in schizophrenia and are associated with functional outcome.
Age had no significant effect on performance for either the clinical or the comparison groups.
The findings suggest that social cognition in these 3 domains fits a stable pattern that has outcome and treatment implications.

Study details

Study designcross-sectional
Participants50
Evidence strengthModerate

How this study scored 57/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a snapshot of people at one point in time. Scored zero for effect reported and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 33 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 57 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Schizophrenia Bulletin)
Journal's citation record	— / 4	No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design	4 / 12	A snapshot of people at one point in time
Strength of evidence	3 / 5	Rated “moderate” in our summary
Peer-review validation	10 / 10	Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent	1 / 5	2011 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	1 / 4	50 participants
Effect reported	0 / 3	No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people	3 / 3	Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomized / blinded	0 / 2	No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited	— / 7	No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year	— / 5	No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year	— / 6	No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here	— / 6	Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited	— / 4	No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record	— / 4	Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record	— / 3	No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multicenter collaboration	— / 3	Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 21345917)
Free to read	2 / 2	Free to read
Points	33 / 58	Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 33 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 57 out of 100.
Total	57 / 100	—

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Related studies in Mild cognitive impairment from nearby years

Also tagged “networks”

187 studies in the library carry the topic tag “networks”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 187 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Mild cognitive impairment

See all studies in Mild cognitive impairment →