This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neuroscience, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neuroscience on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NeuroscienceWikipedia:WikiProject NeuroscienceTemplate:WikiProject Neuroscienceneuroscience articles
Schizophrenia is within the scope of WikiProject Disability. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.DisabilityWikipedia:WikiProject DisabilityTemplate:WikiProject DisabilityDisability articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Autism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of all aspects of autism and autistic culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutismWikipedia:WikiProject AutismTemplate:WikiProject AutismAutism articles
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
May I suggest that characterizing schizophrenia as a "failure to understand reality" is unnecessarily stigmatic? The cited source says nothing about "failure" or "reality." I think the words "failure to understand reality" represent an unneccessary extrapolation on the part of the author(s) of this page. I'm not saying it is an inaccurate description, but I am saying that such an assertion is definitely not directly supported by the cited source. The source says that schizophrenia is characterized by "distortions in thinking, perception, emotions, language, sense of self and behaviour." I see no reason to characterize schizophrenia as a "failure" when there are much more precise ways to describe the disease (i.e., the disease constitutes a distortion, not a failure). Moreover, I fail to see any reason to extrapolate "failure" from a cluster of symptoms described on a WHO page. "Failure" connotes judgment. I suggest that someone in control of this article revise this wording. Even though it might seem trivial, when the very first sentence of the article describes schizophrenia as a "failure" it certainly contributes to the stigma surrounding the disease. I submit my comment very humbly, and without any intention to be inflammatory -- I'm just saying that if I were a schizophrenic I would feel bad if I went to Wikipedia to learn about my disease and found it characterized as a "failure." I would be further distressed if I went to the cited source and found the word "failure" did not appear anywhere in the source. Nor did the word "reality." Using words like these seem to lay bare the judgment of their author. Not very informative.
Prevalence
The prevalence is not 0.5% as indicated but would be rather around 0.4-0.46% according to better sources than the one mentioned in this article. [1]
0.46 is close to 0.5 but it would be at that time more appropriate to the round up to 0.45%. Moreover, the prevalence seems more oriented around 0.4%.
Your article seems more include schizophreniform disorder (duration less than 6 months).
There are, I think, more differential diagnoses than those reported here, including: (M) TBI and PSTBI (psychosis secondary to traumatic brain injury), catatonia, stroke, delusion and psychosis (due to drug abuse or others) and (psychotic) depression.
"Twin and adoption studies of schizophrenia yield inflated estimates of the role that genetics plays in its etiology. More recent molecular genetics studies indicate that genetic factors play a minor role in causing schizophrenia relative to environmental influences.[1][2]"
It is true that neither journal is indexed in PubMed. However, Psychosis has an impact factor assigned by the Journal Citation Reports, and it is indexed in the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), EMCARE, PsycINFO and Scopus. [1] As for Issues in Science and Technology, it is published by the National Academy of Sciences, and given that its WP article describes it as a "policy journal" I took it to be a reputable peer-reviewed outlet, albeit one not indexed in PubMed or having an impact factor. Looking more closely at its page on the NAS website [2] it appears it may not be the peer-reviewed journal I originally thought, so I guess it should not be included here. Everymorningtalk to me 05:09, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
IST is essentially a magazine, on the level of Scientific American or National Geographic. As such, although it may contain excellent articles, it is not a MEDRS-compatible source. Psychosis is a reliable source, I believe, but because it focuses on psychosocial approaches, it is not treated as a medical journal. More importantly, I don't think the quote at the beginning of this section reflects the mainstream of opinion. The mainstream view, I believe, is that schizophrenia has a strong genetic component, but it comes from small contributions by hundreds of individual genes, not from large contributions by a few genes. Looie496 (talk) 13:56, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
In any case, I believe this source should be included making it clear that there are serious concerns about the validity of the classical twin design on which the "80% heritable" claim is based. It was published in Frontiers in Psychiatry, meaning the journal is clearly relevant to the subject of schizophrenia, and it has a solid impact factor (3.532). It appears that it is not indexed in Medline [3] but if you check the journal's about page [4] it appears it is indexed in PubMed. I previously added this study but it was removed for, I think, no good reason. The editor who removed it claimed it was a primary source, [5] but in fact, it is a review article, not a primary source, as is evident from reading the article (it says "review article" just above the date near the top of that page). Everymorningtalk to me 01:34, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I still think this should be treated as a "significant minority" view -- not fringe, but still far from mainstream. Although I don't have the same negative view of Frontiers journals that some editors do, I see this as a relatively unimportant review -- it has received a rousing 15 citations since it was published in 2015, mostly from articles that are themselves not very strong. Looie496 (talk) 15:44, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There are dozens of sources that state that genetics is the single greatest risk factor. This minority opinion would not IMO belong in the lead. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:50, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I agree with that. Looie496 (talk) 17:29, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have read a lot of mainstream reviews of causes of schizophrenia and genetics is nearly always the main cause mentioned. In the Behavior Genetics 6th ed. (leading textbook for the field, I don't have a copy of 7th ed.), the authors cite (p. 234) a heritability of about 80% based on the Sullivan et al 2003 meta-analysis (exact reported value = 81% [73%-90%], k = 12). The entire chapter 14 is dedicated to discussion of this trait. Some researchers think otherwise (as always), but it is a minority view from my reading. Deleet (talk) 17:58, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. This minority opinion should not be in the lead. If for some strange reason we do include it in the lead, then we should also include a sentence or two about how schizophrenogenic mothers cause the illness.... ;^) - Mark D Worthen PsyD(talk) 19:10, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected edit request on 19 June 2018
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
The sentence "Evidence for metacognitive training is mixed with one 2016 review finding benefit and another not.[151][152]" needs to be updated, as there is a more recent meta-analysis suggesting evidence in favor of MCT (-> 10.1111/wvn.12282). I suggest to change the sentence as follows:
"A recent meta-analysis (10.1111/wvn.12282) shows that MCT exerts a significant effect on delusions relative to control conditions at post and follow-up."
Perhaps add that the effect is small to medium to clarify that its effect is lower than that found for antipsychotics Wiki psych21 (talk) 19:36, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
2016 is not that old. New paper is in a journal with an unclear impact factor. Have added it as a ref. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:59, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Doc James, I agree. 2016 is not that old but the meta-analysis from van Oosterhout only covers 3-9 studies (depending on outcome) and perhaps more importantly considers far less patients (N(max) = 438) in comparison to the more recent two meta-analyses (e.g., Eichner & Berna: 15 studies for positive symptoms, N(max)=807 patients!). So, the van Oosterhout et al. meta-analysis might be worth reporting but may not receive the same weight. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing is a journal published by Wiley, a publisher with a good reputation. The most recent impact factor is 2.143.
--Wiki psych21 (talk) 11:31, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"Psychol Med" has an impact factor of 6.2. Per pt numbers I see "(three studies; 219 participants), delusions (seven studies; 500 participants) and positive symptoms (nine studies; 436 participants)" Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:50, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot. Psychol Med has a lower impact (5.475) but I am not sure this is a good index for the quality of an individual study - Schizo Bull (Eichner & Berna) has even a larger impact factor (currently 6.94). I am sorry that my numbers on sample size were inaccurate. Still, the new meta-analyses have a much larger base than the older by van Oosterhout et al. (in their reply letter van Oosterhout et al. even acknowledge that with newer studies their results become significant) and this deserves to be acknowledged I think. Also, the Australian & New Zealand Psychiatrist Association (already in 2016) and the German Psychologists (DGPs, upcoming guidelines) recommend the program for the treatment of positive symptoms which also deserves to be mentioned I think. Again, I am sorry about the false numbers, should not have happened --Wiki psych21 (talk) 08:33, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Mechanism
The mechanism section doesn't flow very well, is somewhat outdated, and focuses a bit too much on DA. I threw together a rough draft in my sandbox, and am looking for input from other editors as to whether or not it would be a good idea to replace the old section.Petergstrom (talk) 23:44, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Mechanism
The cause and mechanism of schizophrenia is unknown. Evidence from phenomenology, pharmacology, neuroimaging, post mortem studies, genetics, and animal models implicate a number of possible mechanisms, such as abnormalities in dopaminergic signalling, glutaminergic neurotransmission, and neurodevelopment. Many frameworks have been hypothesized to link these biological abnormalities to symptoms, including psychological and computational mechanisms.[1]
Abnormal dopamine signalling has been implicated in schizophrenia by the efficacy of D2 receptor agonists, as well as the consistent observation in positron emission tomography of elevated dopamine synthesis[2] and release during acute psychosis.[3] Abnormalities in dopaminergic symptoms have been hypothesized to underlie delusions via dysfunctional signalling of salience.[4][5][6] Dopaminergic predictions errors, which mediate learning when expectancies are violated, are abnormal in schizophrenia, and these abnormalities correlate with the severity of delusions. Furthermore, impaired learning, punitively reflecting the functionality of the dopaminergic system, is present in schizophrenia and correlated with delusion severity as well.[7] Dysfunctional prediction errors may be related to hyperactive input from the hippocampus, which is observed to be metabolically overactive in schizophrenia.[4] Hypoactivation of D1 receptors in the prefrontal cortex may also be responsible for deficits in working memory.[8][9][10][11]
Reduced NMDA receptor signalling is suggested by multiple lines of evidence. Post-mortem studies demonstrate reduced NMDA receptor expression and NMDA receptor agonists mimic both schizophrenia symptoms and the electrophysiological abnormalities associated with schizophrenia (notable reduced mismatch negativity and P300).[12][13][14] This deficit in NMDA signalling may be related to the abnormalities observed in parvalbumininterneurons that express NMDA receptors.[15] Post mortem studies consistently find that a subset of these neurons fail to express GAD67,[16] in addition to abnormalities in morphology. The subsets of interneurons that are abnormal in schizophrenia are responsible for the synchronizing of neural ensembles that is necessary during working memory tasks, a process that electrophysiologically reflected in gamma frequency (30-80 Hz) oscillations. Both working memory tasks and gamma oscillations are impaired in schizophrenia, which may reflect abnormal interneuron functionality.[17][18][19]
Multiple lines of evidence suggest that schizophrenia has a neurodevelopmental component. Schizophrenia is associated with premorbid impairments in cognition, social functioning, and motor skills.[20] Furthermore, prenatal insults such as maternal infection,[21][22] maternal malnutrition and obsteric complications all increase risk for schizophrenia.[23] Animal models of these insults demonstrate patterns of cellular and molecular abnormalities similar to those in schizophrenia, such as increased RELN methylation and abnormal GABAergic cell development.[24] Schizophrenia usually emerges symptomatically during late adolescence, 18-25, an age period that overlaps with certain stages of neurodevelopment that are implicated in schizophrenia.[25]
Deficits in executive functions, such as planning, inhibition, and working memory, are pervasive in schizophrenia. Although these functions are dissociable, their dysfunction in schizophrenia may reflect an underlying deficit in the ability to represent goal related information in working memory, and to utilize this to direct cognition and behavior.[26][27]. These impairments have been linked to a number of neuroimaging and neuropathological abnormalities. For example, functional neuroimaging studies report evidence of reduced neural processing efficiency, whereby the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex is activated to a greater degree to achieve a certain level of performance relative to controls on working memory tasks. These abnormalities may be linked to the consistent post-mortem finding of reduced neuropil, evidenced by increased pyramidal cell density and reduced dentritic spin density. These cellular and functional abnormalities may also be reflected in structural neuroimaging studies that find reduced grey matter volume in association with deficits in working memory tasks.[28]
Positive and negative symptoms have been linked to reduced cortical thickness in the superior temporal lobe,[29] and orbitofrontal cortex, respectively.[30]Anhedonia, traditionally defined as a reduced capacity to experience pleasure, is frequently reported in schizophrenia. However, a large body of evidence suggests that hedonic responses are intact in schizophrenia,[31] and that what is reported to be anhedonia is a reflection of dysfunction in other processes related to reward.[32] Overall, a failure of online maintence and reward associativty is thought to lead to impairment in the generation of cognition and behavior required to obtain rewards, despite normal hedonic responses.[33]
Bayesian models of brain functioning have been utilized to link abnormalities in cellular functioning to symptoms.[34][35] Both hallucinations and delusions have been suggested to reflect improper encoding of prior expectations, thereby causing expectation to excessively influence sensory perception and the formation of beliefs. In canonical models of circuits that mediate predictive coding, hypoactive NMDA receptor activation, similar to that seen in schizophrenia, could theoretically result in classic symptoms of schizophrenia such as delusions and hallucinations.[36][7]
Well, it violates Wikipedia Rule #347: Do not utilize the word "utilize". No, but seriously, it looks pretty good, except that the last paragraph may go a bit deeper than a top-level Wikipedia article ought to. Looie496 (talk) 15:40, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
^ abBroyd, A; Balzan, RP; Woodward, TS; Allen, P (June 2017). "Dopamine, cognitive biases and assessment of certainty: A neurocognitive model of delusions". Clinical psychology review. 54: 96–106. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2017.04.006. PMID28448827.
^Abi-Dargham, A; Moore, H (October 2003). "Prefrontal DA transmission at D1 receptors and the pathology of schizophrenia". The Neuroscientist : a review journal bringing neurobiology, neurology and psychiatry. 9 (5): 404–16. doi:10.1177/1073858403252674. PMID14580124.
^Catts, VS; Lai, YL; Weickert, CS; Weickert, TW; Catts, SV (April 2016). "A quantitative review of the postmortem evidence for decreased cortical N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor expression levels in schizophrenia: How can we link molecular abnormalities to mismatch negativity deficits?". Biological psychology. 116: 57–67. doi:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2015.10.013. PMID26549579.
^Michie, PT; Malmierca, MS; Harms, L; Todd, J (April 2016). "The neurobiology of MMN and implications for schizophrenia". Biological psychology. 116: 90–7. doi:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2016.01.011. PMID26826620.
^Pratt, J; Dawson, N; Morris, BJ; Grent-'t-Jong, T; Roux, F; Uhlhaas, PJ (February 2017). "Thalamo-cortical communication, glutamatergic neurotransmission and neural oscillations: A unique window into the origins of ScZ?". Schizophrenia research. 180: 4–12. doi:10.1016/j.schres.2016.05.013. PMID27317361.
^Young, Jared; Anticevic, Alan; Barch, Deanna (2018). "Cognitive and Motivational Neuroscience of Psychotic Disorders". In Charney, Dennis; Buxbaum, Joseph; Sklar, Pamela; Nestler, Eric (eds.). Charney & Nestler's Neurobiology of Mental Illness (5th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 215, 217. ISBN9780190681425. Several recent reviews (e.g., Cohen and Minor, 2010) have found that individuals with schizophrenia show relatively intact self-reported emotional responses to affect-eliciting stimuli as well as other indicators of intact response(215)...Taken together, the literature increasingly suggests that there may be a deficit in putatively DA-mediated reward learning and/ or reward prediction functions in schizophrenia. Such findings suggest that impairment in striatal reward prediction mechanisms may influence "wanting" in schizophrenia in a way that reduces the ability of individuals with schizophrenia to use anticipated rewards to drive motivated behavior.(217)
^Friston, KJ; Stephan, KE; Montague, R; Dolan, RJ (July 2014). "Computational psychiatry: the brain as a phantastic organ". The lancet. Psychiatry. 1 (2): 148–58. doi:10.1016/S2215-0366(14)70275-5. PMID26360579.
^Fletcher, PC; Frith, CD (January 2009). "Perceiving is believing: a Bayesian approach to explaining the positive symptoms of schizophrenia". Nature reviews. Neuroscience. 10 (1): 48–58. doi:10.1038/nrn2536. PMID19050712.