Different vulnerability indicators for psychosis and their neuropsychological characteristics in the Northern Finland 1986 Birth Cohort

This study is one of very few that has investigated the neuropsychological functioning of both familial and clinical high risk subjects for psychosis. Participants (N = 164) were members of the Northern Finland 1986 Birth Cohort in the following four groups: familial risk for psychosis (n = 62), cli...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology 2011-04, Vol.33 (4), p.385-394
Main Authors: Mukkala, Sari, Ilonen, Tuula, Nordström, Tanja, Miettunen, Jouko, Loukkola, Jukka, Barnett, Jennifer H., Murray, Graham K., Jääskeläinen, Erika, Mäki, Pirjo, Taanila, Anja, Moilanen, Irma, Jones, Peter B., Heinimaa, Markus, Veijola, Juha
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult and adolescent clinical studies
Analysis of Variance
Attention - physiology
Biological and medical sciences
Birth cohort
Clinical risk
Cognition
Cognition Disorders - diagnosis
Cognition Disorders - etiology
Cohort Studies
Executive Function - physiology
Familial risk
Family Health
Female
Finland
General population
Humans
Intelligence - physiology
Learning
Male
Medical sciences
Memory, Short-Term - physiology
Neurocognition
Neuropsychological Tests
Neuropsychology
Other psychotic disorders
Profile
Psychiatric Status Rating Scales
Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry
Psychopathology. Psychiatry
Psychoses
Psychosis
Psychosis risk
Psychotic Disorders - complications
Psychotic Disorders - psychology
Young Adult
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This study is one of very few that has investigated the neuropsychological functioning of both familial and clinical high risk subjects for psychosis. Participants (N = 164) were members of the Northern Finland 1986 Birth Cohort in the following four groups: familial risk for psychosis (n = 62), clinical risk for psychosis (n = 20), psychosis (n = 13), and control subjects (n = 69). The neurocognitive performance of these groups was compared across 19 cognitive variables. The two risk groups did not differ significantly from controls, but differed from the psychosis group in fine motor function. Neuropsychological impairments were not evident in a non-help-seeking high-risk sample.
ISSN:1380-3395
1744-411X
DOI:10.1080/13803395.2010.524148