Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Background Neurocognitive deficits are a core feature of psychosis and depression. Despite commonalities in cognitive alterations, it remains unclear if and how the cognitive deficits in patients at clinical high risk for psychosis (CHR) and those with recent-onset psychosis (ROP) are distinct from those seen in recent-onset depression (ROD). Aims This study was carried out within the European project 'Personalized Prognostic Tools for Early Psychosis Management', and aimed to characterise the cognitive profiles of patients with psychosis or depression. Method We examined cognitive profiles for patients with ROP (n = 105), patients with ROD (n = 123), patients at CHR (n = 116) and healthy controls (n = 372) across seven sites in five European countries. Confirmatory factor analysis identified four cognitive factors independent of gender, education and site: speed of processing, attention and working memory, verbal learning and spatial learning. Results Patients with ROP performed worse than healthy controls in all four domains (P < 0.001), whereas performance of patients with ROD was not affected (P > 0.05). Patients at CHR performed worse than healthy controls in speed of processing (P = 0.001) and spatial learning (P = 0.003), but better than patients with ROP across all cognitive domains (all P ≤ 0.01). CHR and ROD groups did not significantly differ in any cognitive domain. These findings were independent of comorbid depressive symptoms, substance consumption and illness duration. Conclusions These results show that neurocognitive abilities are affected in CHR and ROP, whereas ROD seems spared. Although our findings may support the notion that those at CHR have a specific vulnerability to psychosis, future studies investigating broader transdiagnostic risk cohorts in longitudinal designs are needed.

Original publication

DOI

10.1192/bjp.2023.98

Type

Journal article

Journal

British Journal of Psychiatry

Publication Date

17/10/2023

Volume

223

Pages

485 - 492