ArticleScientific reports2024
Distinct alterations in probabilistic reversal learning across at-risk mental state, first episode psychosis and persistent schizophrenia.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Beyond reward learning deficits: Exploration-exploitation instability reveals computational heterogeneity in value-based decision making in early psychosis.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We used a probabilistic reversal learning task to examine prediction error-driven belief updating in three clinical groups with psychosis or psychosis-like symptoms. Study 1 compared people with at-risk mental state and first episode psychosis (FEP) to matched controls. Study 2 compared people diagnosed with treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) to matched controls. The design replicated our previous work showing ketamine-related perturbations in how meta-level confidence maintained behavioural policy. We applied the same computational modelling analysis here, in order to compare the pharmacological model to three groups at different stages of psychosis. Accuracy was reduced in FEP, reflecting increased tendencies to shift strategy following probabilistic errors. The TRS group also showed a greater tendency to shift choice strategies though accuracy levels were not significantly reduced. Applying the previously-used computational modelling approach, we observed that only the TRS group showed altered confidence-based modulation of responding, previously observed under ketamine administration. Overall, our behavioural findings demonstrated resemblance between clinical groups (FEP and TRS) and ketamine in terms of a reduction in stabilisation of responding in a noisy environment. The computational analysis suggested that TRS, but not FEP, replicates ketamine effects but we consider the computational findings preliminary given limitations in performance of the model.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.