Understanding source monitoring subtypes and their relation to psychosis: a systematic review and meta‐analysis
Aims Source monitoring (SM) is the metacognitive ability to determine the origin of one's experiences. SM is altered in primary psychiatric psychosis, although relationships between SM subtypes, other cognitive domains and symptoms are unclear. Our aims were to synthesize evidence comparing psy...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Psychiatry and clinical neurosciences 2022-05, Vol.76 (5), p.162-171 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 171 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 5 |
| container_start_page | 162 |
| container_title | Psychiatry and clinical neurosciences |
| container_volume | 76 |
| creator | Damiani, Stefano Donadeo, Alberto Bassetti, Nicola Salazar‐de‐Pablo, Gonzalo Guiot, Cecilia Politi, Pierluigi Fusar‐Poli, Paolo |
| description | Aims
Source monitoring (SM) is the metacognitive ability to determine the origin of one's experiences. SM is altered in primary psychiatric psychosis, although relationships between SM subtypes, other cognitive domains and symptoms are unclear. Our aims were to synthesize evidence comparing psychosis ‐with and without hallucinations‐ and healthy controls classifying SM subtypes by source discrimination (internal/external/reality monitoring) and stimulus modality (visual/auditory/imagined/performed).
Methods
This systematic review adopted Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses, Meta‐analyses Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology and Population, Intervention, Comparison and Outcomes guidelines. Core demographical and clinical parameters were extracted. Newcastle‐Ottawa Scale was used as quality check. SM differences between (i) psychosis patients versus healthy controls and (ii) patients with versus without hallucinations were investigated via random‐effect model meta‐analysis. The primary effect size measure was standardized mean difference (SMD) in each SM subtype performance (error or accuracy). Heterogeneity, publication biases and meta‐regressions were assessed.
Results
Five thousand two hundred and fifty‐six records were screened to finally include 44 studies (1566 patients, 1175 controls). Mean Newcastle‐Ottawa score was 7.41 out of 9. Few studies measured SM associations with cognition (n = 9) and symptoms (n = 19), with heterogeneous findings. SM performance across all measures was reduced in psychosis versus healthy controls (SMD = 0.458). Internal SM (SMD: errors = 0.513; accuracy = 0.733) and imagined stimuli (SMD: errors = 0.688; accuracy = 0.978) were specifically impaired. Patients with versus without hallucinations showed SM deficits only for externalizing (SMD = 0.410) and imagined/auditory (SMD = 0.498/0.277) errors.
Conclusion
The proposed classifications highlight specific SM deficits for internal/imagined stimuli in psychosis, providing evidence‐based indications to design and interpret future studies. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/pcn.13338 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9313862</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2661836412</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4678-672919caf8c20058479416420657334e41f70e3f711b20f060aeaea05eea42333</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kc9u1DAQxi0EoqVw4AWQJS70kNZje52EQyW0Kn-kCjjQs-X1TrquEju1nVa58Qg8I0-Cd7dUgITnYGvm508z8xHyEtgJlHM6Wn8CQojmETkEKVkFDbSPy1twUYEAdUCepXTNGBNCwVNyIBbAZaPaQ3Jz6dcYUzZ-7fwVTWGKFukQvMsh7jLTKs8jJloImjfoIo3Ym-yCpznQMc12E5JLb6mhaU4Zh1Kzhbl1eLf7NGA2P7__MN70cwGfkyed6RO-uL-PyOX782_Lj9XFlw-flu8uKitV3VSq5i201nSN5YwtGlm3EpTkTC1qISRK6GqGoqsBVpx1TDGDJdgC0UhelnFEzva647QacG3R52h6PUY3mDjrYJz-u-LdRl-FW90KEI3iReDNvUAMNxOmrAeXLPa98RimpLkqwRWDLfr6H_S6LLIMvKUUNELJHXW8p2wMKUXsHpoBprdG6mKk3hlZ2Fd_dv9A_nauAKd74M71OP9fSX9dft5L_gKr6Kok</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2661836412</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Understanding source monitoring subtypes and their relation to psychosis: a systematic review and meta‐analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Journals</source><source>Wiley Online Library Free Content</source><source>Open Access Titles of Japan</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Damiani, Stefano ; Donadeo, Alberto ; Bassetti, Nicola ; Salazar‐de‐Pablo, Gonzalo ; Guiot, Cecilia ; Politi, Pierluigi ; Fusar‐Poli, Paolo</creator><creatorcontrib>Damiani, Stefano ; Donadeo, Alberto ; Bassetti, Nicola ; Salazar‐de‐Pablo, Gonzalo ; Guiot, Cecilia ; Politi, Pierluigi ; Fusar‐Poli, Paolo</creatorcontrib><description>Aims
Source monitoring (SM) is the metacognitive ability to determine the origin of one's experiences. SM is altered in primary psychiatric psychosis, although relationships between SM subtypes, other cognitive domains and symptoms are unclear. Our aims were to synthesize evidence comparing psychosis ‐with and without hallucinations‐ and healthy controls classifying SM subtypes by source discrimination (internal/external/reality monitoring) and stimulus modality (visual/auditory/imagined/performed).
Methods
This systematic review adopted Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses, Meta‐analyses Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology and Population, Intervention, Comparison and Outcomes guidelines. Core demographical and clinical parameters were extracted. Newcastle‐Ottawa Scale was used as quality check. SM differences between (i) psychosis patients versus healthy controls and (ii) patients with versus without hallucinations were investigated via random‐effect model meta‐analysis. The primary effect size measure was standardized mean difference (SMD) in each SM subtype performance (error or accuracy). Heterogeneity, publication biases and meta‐regressions were assessed.
Results
Five thousand two hundred and fifty‐six records were screened to finally include 44 studies (1566 patients, 1175 controls). Mean Newcastle‐Ottawa score was 7.41 out of 9. Few studies measured SM associations with cognition (n = 9) and symptoms (n = 19), with heterogeneous findings. SM performance across all measures was reduced in psychosis versus healthy controls (SMD = 0.458). Internal SM (SMD: errors = 0.513; accuracy = 0.733) and imagined stimuli (SMD: errors = 0.688; accuracy = 0.978) were specifically impaired. Patients with versus without hallucinations showed SM deficits only for externalizing (SMD = 0.410) and imagined/auditory (SMD = 0.498/0.277) errors.
Conclusion
The proposed classifications highlight specific SM deficits for internal/imagined stimuli in psychosis, providing evidence‐based indications to design and interpret future studies.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1323-1316</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1440-1819</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1440-1819</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/pcn.13338</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35124869</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Melbourne: John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd</publisher><subject>Accuracy ; Auditory discrimination ; Cognition ; Cognitive ability ; Epidemiology ; externalizing bias ; Hallucinations ; Hallucinations - epidemiology ; Humans ; Meta-analysis ; Metacognition ; Patients ; Population studies ; Psychosis ; Psychotic Disorders - epidemiology ; Review ; schizophrenia spectrum ; Sensory integration ; source monitoring ; Systematic review ; Visual discrimination ; Visual stimuli</subject><ispartof>Psychiatry and clinical neurosciences, 2022-05, Vol.76 (5), p.162-171</ispartof><rights>2022 The Authors. published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japanese Society of Psychiatry and Neurology.</rights><rights>2022 The Authors. Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japanese Society of Psychiatry and Neurology.</rights><rights>2022. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4678-672919caf8c20058479416420657334e41f70e3f711b20f060aeaea05eea42333</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4678-672919caf8c20058479416420657334e41f70e3f711b20f060aeaea05eea42333</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-5235-0788 ; 0000-0002-6992-0767</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fpcn.13338$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fpcn.13338$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,1417,1433,27924,27925,45574,45575,46409,46833</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35124869$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Damiani, Stefano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Donadeo, Alberto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bassetti, Nicola</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salazar‐de‐Pablo, Gonzalo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guiot, Cecilia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Politi, Pierluigi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fusar‐Poli, Paolo</creatorcontrib><title>Understanding source monitoring subtypes and their relation to psychosis: a systematic review and meta‐analysis</title><title>Psychiatry and clinical neurosciences</title><addtitle>Psychiatry Clin Neurosci</addtitle><description>Aims
Source monitoring (SM) is the metacognitive ability to determine the origin of one's experiences. SM is altered in primary psychiatric psychosis, although relationships between SM subtypes, other cognitive domains and symptoms are unclear. Our aims were to synthesize evidence comparing psychosis ‐with and without hallucinations‐ and healthy controls classifying SM subtypes by source discrimination (internal/external/reality monitoring) and stimulus modality (visual/auditory/imagined/performed).
Methods
This systematic review adopted Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses, Meta‐analyses Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology and Population, Intervention, Comparison and Outcomes guidelines. Core demographical and clinical parameters were extracted. Newcastle‐Ottawa Scale was used as quality check. SM differences between (i) psychosis patients versus healthy controls and (ii) patients with versus without hallucinations were investigated via random‐effect model meta‐analysis. The primary effect size measure was standardized mean difference (SMD) in each SM subtype performance (error or accuracy). Heterogeneity, publication biases and meta‐regressions were assessed.
Results
Five thousand two hundred and fifty‐six records were screened to finally include 44 studies (1566 patients, 1175 controls). Mean Newcastle‐Ottawa score was 7.41 out of 9. Few studies measured SM associations with cognition (n = 9) and symptoms (n = 19), with heterogeneous findings. SM performance across all measures was reduced in psychosis versus healthy controls (SMD = 0.458). Internal SM (SMD: errors = 0.513; accuracy = 0.733) and imagined stimuli (SMD: errors = 0.688; accuracy = 0.978) were specifically impaired. Patients with versus without hallucinations showed SM deficits only for externalizing (SMD = 0.410) and imagined/auditory (SMD = 0.498/0.277) errors.
Conclusion
The proposed classifications highlight specific SM deficits for internal/imagined stimuli in psychosis, providing evidence‐based indications to design and interpret future studies.</description><subject>Accuracy</subject><subject>Auditory discrimination</subject><subject>Cognition</subject><subject>Cognitive ability</subject><subject>Epidemiology</subject><subject>externalizing bias</subject><subject>Hallucinations</subject><subject>Hallucinations - epidemiology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Metacognition</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Population studies</subject><subject>Psychosis</subject><subject>Psychotic Disorders - epidemiology</subject><subject>Review</subject><subject>schizophrenia spectrum</subject><subject>Sensory integration</subject><subject>source monitoring</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><subject>Visual discrimination</subject><subject>Visual stimuli</subject><issn>1323-1316</issn><issn>1440-1819</issn><issn>1440-1819</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>WIN</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kc9u1DAQxi0EoqVw4AWQJS70kNZje52EQyW0Kn-kCjjQs-X1TrquEju1nVa58Qg8I0-Cd7dUgITnYGvm508z8xHyEtgJlHM6Wn8CQojmETkEKVkFDbSPy1twUYEAdUCepXTNGBNCwVNyIBbAZaPaQ3Jz6dcYUzZ-7fwVTWGKFukQvMsh7jLTKs8jJloImjfoIo3Ym-yCpznQMc12E5JLb6mhaU4Zh1Kzhbl1eLf7NGA2P7__MN70cwGfkyed6RO-uL-PyOX782_Lj9XFlw-flu8uKitV3VSq5i201nSN5YwtGlm3EpTkTC1qISRK6GqGoqsBVpx1TDGDJdgC0UhelnFEzva647QacG3R52h6PUY3mDjrYJz-u-LdRl-FW90KEI3iReDNvUAMNxOmrAeXLPa98RimpLkqwRWDLfr6H_S6LLIMvKUUNELJHXW8p2wMKUXsHpoBprdG6mKk3hlZ2Fd_dv9A_nauAKd74M71OP9fSX9dft5L_gKr6Kok</recordid><startdate>202205</startdate><enddate>202205</enddate><creator>Damiani, Stefano</creator><creator>Donadeo, Alberto</creator><creator>Bassetti, Nicola</creator><creator>Salazar‐de‐Pablo, Gonzalo</creator><creator>Guiot, Cecilia</creator><creator>Politi, Pierluigi</creator><creator>Fusar‐Poli, Paolo</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5235-0788</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6992-0767</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202205</creationdate><title>Understanding source monitoring subtypes and their relation to psychosis: a systematic review and meta‐analysis</title><author>Damiani, Stefano ; Donadeo, Alberto ; Bassetti, Nicola ; Salazar‐de‐Pablo, Gonzalo ; Guiot, Cecilia ; Politi, Pierluigi ; Fusar‐Poli, Paolo</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4678-672919caf8c20058479416420657334e41f70e3f711b20f060aeaea05eea42333</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Accuracy</topic><topic>Auditory discrimination</topic><topic>Cognition</topic><topic>Cognitive ability</topic><topic>Epidemiology</topic><topic>externalizing bias</topic><topic>Hallucinations</topic><topic>Hallucinations - epidemiology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Metacognition</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Population studies</topic><topic>Psychosis</topic><topic>Psychotic Disorders - epidemiology</topic><topic>Review</topic><topic>schizophrenia spectrum</topic><topic>Sensory integration</topic><topic>source monitoring</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><topic>Visual discrimination</topic><topic>Visual stimuli</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Damiani, Stefano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Donadeo, Alberto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bassetti, Nicola</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salazar‐de‐Pablo, Gonzalo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guiot, Cecilia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Politi, Pierluigi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fusar‐Poli, Paolo</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection)</collection><collection>Wiley Online Library Free Content</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Psychiatry and clinical neurosciences</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Damiani, Stefano</au><au>Donadeo, Alberto</au><au>Bassetti, Nicola</au><au>Salazar‐de‐Pablo, Gonzalo</au><au>Guiot, Cecilia</au><au>Politi, Pierluigi</au><au>Fusar‐Poli, Paolo</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Understanding source monitoring subtypes and their relation to psychosis: a systematic review and meta‐analysis</atitle><jtitle>Psychiatry and clinical neurosciences</jtitle><addtitle>Psychiatry Clin Neurosci</addtitle><date>2022-05</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>76</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>162</spage><epage>171</epage><pages>162-171</pages><issn>1323-1316</issn><issn>1440-1819</issn><eissn>1440-1819</eissn><abstract>Aims
Source monitoring (SM) is the metacognitive ability to determine the origin of one's experiences. SM is altered in primary psychiatric psychosis, although relationships between SM subtypes, other cognitive domains and symptoms are unclear. Our aims were to synthesize evidence comparing psychosis ‐with and without hallucinations‐ and healthy controls classifying SM subtypes by source discrimination (internal/external/reality monitoring) and stimulus modality (visual/auditory/imagined/performed).
Methods
This systematic review adopted Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses, Meta‐analyses Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology and Population, Intervention, Comparison and Outcomes guidelines. Core demographical and clinical parameters were extracted. Newcastle‐Ottawa Scale was used as quality check. SM differences between (i) psychosis patients versus healthy controls and (ii) patients with versus without hallucinations were investigated via random‐effect model meta‐analysis. The primary effect size measure was standardized mean difference (SMD) in each SM subtype performance (error or accuracy). Heterogeneity, publication biases and meta‐regressions were assessed.
Results
Five thousand two hundred and fifty‐six records were screened to finally include 44 studies (1566 patients, 1175 controls). Mean Newcastle‐Ottawa score was 7.41 out of 9. Few studies measured SM associations with cognition (n = 9) and symptoms (n = 19), with heterogeneous findings. SM performance across all measures was reduced in psychosis versus healthy controls (SMD = 0.458). Internal SM (SMD: errors = 0.513; accuracy = 0.733) and imagined stimuli (SMD: errors = 0.688; accuracy = 0.978) were specifically impaired. Patients with versus without hallucinations showed SM deficits only for externalizing (SMD = 0.410) and imagined/auditory (SMD = 0.498/0.277) errors.
Conclusion
The proposed classifications highlight specific SM deficits for internal/imagined stimuli in psychosis, providing evidence‐based indications to design and interpret future studies.</abstract><cop>Melbourne</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd</pub><pmid>35124869</pmid><doi>10.1111/pcn.13338</doi><tpages>10</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5235-0788</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6992-0767</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1323-1316 |
| ispartof | Psychiatry and clinical neurosciences, 2022-05, Vol.76 (5), p.162-171 |
| issn | 1323-1316 1440-1819 1440-1819 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9313862 |
| source | MEDLINE; Wiley Journals; Wiley Online Library Free Content; Open Access Titles of Japan; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | Accuracy Auditory discrimination Cognition Cognitive ability Epidemiology externalizing bias Hallucinations Hallucinations - epidemiology Humans Meta-analysis Metacognition Patients Population studies Psychosis Psychotic Disorders - epidemiology Review schizophrenia spectrum Sensory integration source monitoring Systematic review Visual discrimination Visual stimuli |
| title | Understanding source monitoring subtypes and their relation to psychosis: a systematic review and meta‐analysis |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T14%3A45%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Understanding%20source%20monitoring%20subtypes%20and%20their%20relation%20to%20psychosis:%20a%20systematic%20review%20and%20meta%E2%80%90analysis&rft.jtitle=Psychiatry%20and%20clinical%20neurosciences&rft.au=Damiani,%20Stefano&rft.date=2022-05&rft.volume=76&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=162&rft.epage=171&rft.pages=162-171&rft.issn=1323-1316&rft.eissn=1440-1819&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/pcn.13338&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2661836412%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2661836412&rft_id=info:pmid/35124869&rfr_iscdi=true |