Abstract：
BACKGROUND: This systematic review and meta-analysis explored the relationship between cognitive phenotypes of compulsivity and impulsivity and clinical variables in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD).
METHODS: We searched Pubmed, Scopus, Cochrane Library and PsychINFO databases until February 2023 for studies comparing patients with OCD and healthy controls on cognitive tests of compulsivity and impulsivity. The study followed PRISMA guidelines and was pre-registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021299017).
RESULTS: Meta-analyses of 112 studies involving 8313 participants (4289 patients with OCD and 4024 healthy controls) identified significant impairments in compulsivity (g = -0.58, [95%CI -0.68, -0.47]; k = 76) and impulsivity (g = -0.48, [95%CI -0.57, -0.38]; k = 63); no significant difference between impairments. Medication use and comorbid psychiatric disorders were not significantly related to impairments. No associations were revealed with OCD severity, depression/anxiety, or illness duration.
CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive phenotypes of compulsivity and impulsivity in patients with OCD appear to be orthogonal to clinical variables, including severity of OCD symptomatology. Their clinical impact is poorly understood and may require different clinical assessment tools and interventions.
METHODS: We searched Pubmed, Scopus, Cochrane Library and PsychINFO databases until February 2023 for studies comparing patients with OCD and healthy controls on cognitive tests of compulsivity and impulsivity. The study followed PRISMA guidelines and was pre-registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021299017).
RESULTS: Meta-analyses of 112 studies involving 8313 participants (4289 patients with OCD and 4024 healthy controls) identified significant impairments in compulsivity (g = -0.58, [95%CI -0.68, -0.47]; k = 76) and impulsivity (g = -0.48, [95%CI -0.57, -0.38]; k = 63); no significant difference between impairments. Medication use and comorbid psychiatric disorders were not significantly related to impairments. No associations were revealed with OCD severity, depression/anxiety, or illness duration.
CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive phenotypes of compulsivity and impulsivity in patients with OCD appear to be orthogonal to clinical variables, including severity of OCD symptomatology. Their clinical impact is poorly understood and may require different clinical assessment tools and interventions.
摘要：
背景：这项系统综述和荟萃分析探讨了强迫症（OCD）中强迫性和冲动性的认知表型与临床变量之间的关系。
方法：我们搜索了Pubmed，Scopus,Cochrane图书馆和PsychINFO数据库，直到2023年2月，用于比较强迫症患者和健康对照者的强迫性和冲动性认知测试。该研究遵循PRISMA指南，并在PROSPERO（CRD42021299017）上预先注册。
结果：对包括8313名参与者（4289名强迫症患者和4024名健康对照者）的112项研究进行的荟萃分析发现，强迫性（g=-0.58，[95CI-0.68，-0.47]；k=76）和冲动性（g=-0.48，[95CI-0.57，-0.38]；k=63）之间无显著药物使用和并存的精神疾病与损伤没有显着相关。没有发现与强迫症严重程度有关联，抑郁/焦虑,或疾病持续时间。
结论：强迫症患者强迫性和冲动性的认知表型似乎与临床变量正交，包括强迫症症状的严重程度。它们的临床影响知之甚少，可能需要不同的临床评估工具和干预措施。
方法：我们搜索了Pubmed，Scopus,Cochrane图书馆和PsychINFO数据库，直到2023年2月，用于比较强迫症患者和健康对照者的强迫性和冲动性认知测试。该研究遵循PRISMA指南，并在PROSPERO（CRD42021299017）上预先注册。
结果：对包括8313名参与者（4289名强迫症患者和4024名健康对照者）的112项研究进行的荟萃分析发现，强迫性（g=-0.58，[95CI-0.68，-0.47]；k=76）和冲动性（g=-0.48，[95CI-0.57，-0.38]；k=63）之间无显著药物使用和并存的精神疾病与损伤没有显着相关。没有发现与强迫症严重程度有关联，抑郁/焦虑,或疾病持续时间。
结论：强迫症患者强迫性和冲动性的认知表型似乎与临床变量正交，包括强迫症症状的严重程度。它们的临床影响知之甚少，可能需要不同的临床评估工具和干预措施。
