Abstract
AimsSource 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).MethodsThis 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.ResultsFive 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.ConclusionThe proposed classifications highlight specific SM deficits for internal/imagined stimuli in psychosis, providing evidence‐based indications to design and interpret future studies.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: 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.