Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33479736›Full record

SynthesisSchizophrenia bulletin2021

The Self in the Spectrum: A Meta-analysis of the Evidence Linking Basic Self-Disorders and Schizophrenia.

Andrea Raballo, Michele Poletti, Antonio Preti, Josef Parnas

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Schizophrenia bulletin, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
102.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

53 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 116 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Poor insight and self-disorders in schizophrenia: an empirical study.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Andrea RaballoSection of Psychiatry, Clinical Psychology and Rehabilitation, Department of Medicine, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3709-4111
Michele PolettiDepartment of Mental Health and Pathological Addiction, Child and Adolescent Neuropsychiatry Service, Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale-IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Antonio PretiDepartment of Neuroscience, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Josef ParnasCenter for Subjectivity Research, University of Copenhagen, 2300, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Azienda Sanitaria Unità Locale di Reggio Emilia · ITUniversity of Copenhagen · DKUniversity of Perugia · ITUniversity of Turin · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Disturbed self-experience has been reported as a characteristic feature of schizophrenia since the first formulation of its diagnostic concept; however, only in the last 2 decades an explicit notion of basic Self-disturbance, or Self-Disorders (SD), has emerged as target for a systematic research program. We conducted systematic searches in bibliographical databases to identify cross-sectional studies that explored SD across different diagnostic groups and explored diagnostic ascription within or outside schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD) as main outcome. Data were pooled using fixed- and random-effects meta-analysis models. Heterogeneity was assessed using stratified meta-analyses and meta-regression. Of 218 identified studies, 32 were included in the systematic review and 27 in the meta-analysis. Patients diagnosed with SSD scored higher on measures of SD than healthy controls (HC) (Hedges' g = 1.8; 95% CI = 1.5 to 2.0), individuals diagnosed with other mental illness (OMI) (1.9; 1.6 to 2.2), bipolar or affective disorders (1.8; 1.4 to 2.2), and clinical high risk for psychosis (CHR) (1.6; 0.9 to 2.4). Patients with schizotypy or schizotypal personality disorder scored higher on measures of SD than OMI (1.5; 1.3 to 1.8) and HC (1.4; 1.1 to 1.7). Patients with first-episode psychosis scored higher on measures of SD than HC (2.5; 2.1 to 2.9) and OMI (1.6; 1.2 to 2.1). Subjects at CHR scored higher on measures of SD than HC (2.0; 1.7 to 2.2) and OMI (19; 1.6 to 2.2). Overall, heterogeneity ranged from negligible to high, especially in comparisons of the target group with OMI, probably as a reflection of the immanent diagnostic heterogeneity of this group. The findings suggest that SD selectively aggregate within schizophrenia spectrum disorders as compared to other mental disorders and that they could be a central phenotypic marker of vulnerability to schizophrenia across the different shades of severity of its spectrum of disorders.

Indexed as

SchizophreniaSchizophrenic PsychologySelf-AssessmentHumansdiagnosisphenomenologyschizophrenia spectrumself-disordersubjectivity

Identifiers

PMID33479736
PMCPMC8266610
OpenAlexW3126117787

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.