背景:Antisaccade,被描述为看着目标的相反位置,是用于评估精神分裂症认知功能的眼球运动范例。反扫视中扫视的启动和维持由额叶和顶叶皮层区域管理。前视异常是精神分裂症中公认的发现。然而,在精神病性障碍的早期阶段和精神病的临床/家族风险的研究报告了不一致的结果。当前的系统评价旨在回顾研究首次发作精神病(FEP)的反扫视错误率的研究结果,精神病高危人群(UHRP),与健康对照组相比,家族性精神病高风险(FHRP)。
方法:对17项研究进行了荟萃分析,以定量评估FEP的反扫视错误,UHR-P和FHRP。在总共860个FEP之间比较了错误率(Hedges\'g),UHRP,FHRP,和817个健康对照。效果大小的对冲\'g,I2用于估计变异性的百分比,通过R软件评估发表偏倚。
结果:这项荟萃分析的结果表明,FEP与抗扫视错误率的稳健缺陷相关(g=1.16,CI=0.95-1.38)。此外,临床和家族性高危组的AS错误均出现小幅但显著的增加(分别为g=0.26,CI=0.02~0.52和g=0.34,CI=0.13~0.55).
结论:FEP估计的大效应大小与先前报道的慢性精神分裂症患者的结果一致。此外,亲属有小到中等效应大小和显著差异的异常.目前的发现表明,反扫视错误可能是精神病的潜在内表型。
BACKGROUND: Antisaccade, which is described as looking at the opposite location of the target, is an eye movements paradigm used for assessing cognitive functions in schizophrenia. Initiation and sustainment of
saccades in antisaccade are managed by frontal and parietal cortical areas. Antisaccade abnormalities are well-established findings in schizophrenia. However, studies in the early phases of psychotic disorders and clinical/familial risk for psychosis reported inconsistent findings. The current systematic
review aimed to
review the results of studies investigating antisaccade error rates in first-episode psychosis (FEP), individuals with ultra-high-risk for psychosis (UHRP), and familial-high-risk for psychosis (FHRP) compared to healthy controls.
METHODS: A meta-analysis of 17 studies was conducted to quantitatively
review antisaccade errors in FEP, UHR-P and FHRP. The error rate (Hedges\'g) was compared between the total of 860 FEP, UHRP, FHRP, and 817 healthy controls. Hedges\' g for effect size, I2 for estimating the percentage of variability, and publication bias were evaluated through the R software.
RESULTS: The outcomes of this meta-analysis suggested that FEP is associated with a robust deficit in the antisaccade error rate (g = 1.16, CI = 0.95-1.38). Additionally, both the clinical and familial high-risk groups showed small but significant increases in AS errors (g = 0.26, CI = 0.02-0.52 and g = 0.34, CI = 0.13-0.55, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: The large effect size estimated for FEP was compatible with previously reported results in chronic schizophrenia patients. Additionally, relatives had abnormalities with small to medium effect sizes and significant differences. The current findings suggest that antisaccade errors might be a potential endophenotype for psychotic disorders.