Schizophrenia research · 2026
Social functioning and formal thought disorder in schizophrenia: A Bayesian meta-analysis.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Soldovieri Clara Benedetta Caterina, Elleuch Dalia, Ahrens Jessica, Bambini Valentina, Delgaram-Nejad Oliver, Garani Ranjini, Harrison Neil A, Kircher Tilo, Kuperberg Gina, Rossell Susan L, Sommer Iris E, Bosia Marta, Palaniyappan Lena
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Formal thought disorder (FTD) is a key determinant of social functioning in schizophrenia. However, existing syntheses have not differentiated positive versus negative FTD dimensions, which have distinct trajectories, mechanisms, and treatment implications. We examined the differential associations of positive and negative FTD with social functioning.
METHODS: A comprehensive systematic review with stricter inclusion criteria to update prior meta-analyses, searching Scopus and PubMed for publications up to 31 January 2026. Bayesian random-effects meta-analyses were performed separately for negative FTD (k = 7 studies, N = 1226) and positive FTD (k = 24, N = 4072). Bias was assessed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Robust Bayesian methods assessed publication bias. Protocol pre-registered with OSF: 10.17605/OSF.IO/WMT3X.
RESULTS: Both dimensions showed negative associations with social functioning. Positive FTD demonstrated a robust pooled effect (r = -0.31, 95% CrI: -0.40 to -0.20) with extreme evidence (BF10 > 100, posterior probability ~100%). Negative FTD showed a smaller effect (r = -0.21, 95% CrI: -0.38 to 0.000) with moderate evidence (BF10 = 7.97, posterior probability = 88.9%). Positive FTD accounts for more variance in functioning than negative FTD, but this difference is not robust due to paucity of negative FTD studies. High heterogeneity (I2 > 76%), unexplained by known moderators, indicates substantial variation across study settings.
CONCLUSIONS: Both FTD dimensions link to poorer social functioning, with stronger evidence for positive FTD due to more studies and larger samples. Positive FTD may affect social functioning by disrupting communicative competence, highlighting a need for interventions targeting communication deficits.
METHODS: A comprehensive systematic review with stricter inclusion criteria to update prior meta-analyses, searching Scopus and PubMed for publications up to 31 January 2026. Bayesian random-effects meta-analyses were performed separately for negative FTD (k = 7 studies, N = 1226) and positive FTD (k = 24, N = 4072). Bias was assessed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Robust Bayesian methods assessed publication bias. Protocol pre-registered with OSF: 10.17605/OSF.IO/WMT3X.
RESULTS: Both dimensions showed negative associations with social functioning. Positive FTD demonstrated a robust pooled effect (r = -0.31, 95% CrI: -0.40 to -0.20) with extreme evidence (BF10 > 100, posterior probability ~100%). Negative FTD showed a smaller effect (r = -0.21, 95% CrI: -0.38 to 0.000) with moderate evidence (BF10 = 7.97, posterior probability = 88.9%). Positive FTD accounts for more variance in functioning than negative FTD, but this difference is not robust due to paucity of negative FTD studies. High heterogeneity (I2 > 76%), unexplained by known moderators, indicates substantial variation across study settings.
CONCLUSIONS: Both FTD dimensions link to poorer social functioning, with stronger evidence for positive FTD due to more studies and larger samples. Positive FTD may affect social functioning by disrupting communicative competence, highlighting a need for interventions targeting communication deficits.