Abstract
SummaryBackgroundSex differences were found in several domains in individuals at ultra-high risk for psychosis, but no previous work has systematically reviewed and analysed possible sex differences in metacognition in this population. However, alterations in metacognitive beliefs have been shown in the at-risk mental state for psychosis population. Our aim was to qualitatively review and quantitatively analyse the existing literature for data on sex differences in metacognitive beliefs—mainly depicted by the Metacognitions Questionnaire (MCQ) and its short form (MCQ-30)—in individuals with at-risk mental states.MethodsWe performed a systematic review of the literature on metacognition in help-seeking adolescents and young adults at ultra-high risk for psychosis. We included peer-reviewed articles that included a high-risk for psychosis group assessed with operationalised criteria and instruments. For the quantitative meta-analysis, only studies comparing MCQ data in high-risk individuals were included. A fixed-effect meta-model was used and forest plots drawn for each subscale and overall score. The studies were weighted according to the inverse variance method in order to calculate pooled confidence intervals and p values.ResultsNo article on metacognitive beliefs in individuals at increased risk for psychosis explicitly reported possible sex differences. Our meta-analysis of 234 (57% male) individuals’ scores in the MCQ yielded no significant sex difference.ConclusionsCurrently, no sex differences in metacognition can be described in the at-risk population; however, data are insufficient and heterogeneous with regard to thoroughly answering the question whether sex differences in clinical high-risk populations are mirrored in the metacognitive domain.
Highlights
Metacognition is generally described as “thinking about one’s own thinking” [1]
Currently, no sex differences in metacognition can be described in the at-risk population; data are insufficient and heterogeneous with regard to thoroughly answering the question whether sex differences in clinical high-risk populations are mirrored in the metacognitive domain
Zusammenfassung Grundlagen Geschlechtsunterschiede wurden für Psychose-Risiko-Individuen in verschiedenen Bereichen gefunden, jedoch wurde Metakognition in dieser Population bisher nicht systematisch auf Unterschiede untersucht
Summary
Metacognitive beliefs and dysfunctions have gained research focus in the past two decades Their potential relevance with respect to the maintenance and even induction of symptoms in different psychiatric diseases such as psychotic disorders, anxiety disorders and depression [2, 3] is being increasingly discussed. The ARMS concept identifies young people at markedly increased risk for psychosis [8]. It is defined as experiencing at least one of the three ultra-high risk (UHR) criteria: (i) genetic risk and deterioration syndrome, i.e. genetic risk for psychosis in a first-degree relative or schizotypal disorder in the individual and relevant drop in functioning; (ii) attenuated psychotic syndrome, and (iii) brief limited intermittent psychotic symptoms
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
