Prevalence of cognitive impairments and strengths in the early course of psychosis and depression
Alexandra Stainton, Katharine Chisholm, Siân Lowri Griffiths, Lana Kambeitz‐Ilankovic, Julian Wenzel, Carolina Bonivento, Paolo Brambilla, Mariam Iqbal, Theresa Lichtenstein, Marlene Rosen, Linda A. Antonucci, Eleonora Maggioni, Joseph Kambeitz, Stefan Borgwardt, Anita Riecher‐Rössler, Christina Andreou, André Schmidt, Frauke Schultze‐Lutter, Eva Meisenzahl, Stephan Ruhrmann, Raimo K. R. Salokangas, Christos Pantelis, Rebekka Lencer, Georg Romer, Alessandro Bertolino, Rachel Upthegrove, Nikolaos Koutsouleris, Kelly Allott, Stephen J. Wood
Abstract
Abstract Background Studies investigating cognitive impairments in psychosis and depression have typically compared the average performance of the clinical group against healthy controls (HC), and do not report on the actual prevalence of cognitive impairments or strengths within these clinical groups. This information is essential so that clinical services can provide adequate resources to supporting cognitive functioning. Thus, we investigated this prevalence in individuals in the early course of psychosis or depression. Methods A comprehensive cognitive test battery comprising 12 tests was completed by 1286 individuals aged 15–41 (mean age 25.07, s.d. 5.88) from the PRONIA study at baseline: HC ( N = 454), clinical high risk for psychosis (CHR; N = 270), recent-onset depression (ROD; N = 267), and recent-onset psychosis (ROP; N = 295). Z-scores were calculated to estimate the prevalence of moderate or severe deficits or strengths (>2 s.d. or 1–2 s.d. below or above HC, respectively) for each cognitive test. Results Impairment in at least two cognitive tests was as follows: ROP (88.3% moderately, 45.1% severely impaired), CHR (71.2% moderately, 22.4% severely impaired), ROD (61.6% moderately, 16.2% severely impaired). Across clinical groups, impairments were most prevalent in tests of working memory, processing speed, and verbal learning. Above average performance (>1 s.d. ) in at least two tests was present for 40.5% ROD, 36.1% CHR, 16.1% ROP, and was >2 SDs in 1.8% ROD, 1.4% CHR, and 0% ROP. Conclusions These findings suggest that interventions should be tailored to the individual, with working memory, processing speed, and verbal learning likely to be important transdiagnostic targets.