ArticleJournal of neuropsychology2025
Understanding barriers and optimizing socio-cognitive assessment in the diagnosis of neurocognitive disorders.
Article in Journal of neuropsychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond memories: A narrative review on the role of amygdalo-hippocampal complex in social cognition.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026Review
- Normative data and clinical usability of the brief examination of social abilities: a novel screening test for social cognition.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026Article
- A novel ecological approach to assess theory of Mind and social norm understanding for social cognition phenotyping in multiple sclerosis.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- International consensus for the assessment of social cognition in neurocognitive disorders: framework definition and clinical recommendations of the SIGNATURE initiative.Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2025Article
- Reference-Group Adjusted Behavioural Dysfunction Questionnaire Score Discriminates Highly Behavioural-Variant Frontotemporal Dementia From Major Depressive Disorder and Alzheimer's Disease Dementia.European journal of neurology · 2025Article
- Understanding barriers and optimizing socio-cognitive assessment in the diagnosis of neurocognitive disorders.Journal of neuropsychology · 2025Article
- Editorial: When (and how) Theory of Mind is useful? Evidence from innovative assessment tools, training, and treatments strategies, volume II.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Empathy in mild cognitive impairment: a preliminary clinical comparative study in Southern Switzerland using the interpersonal reactivity index (IRI) and the story-based empathy task (SET).Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 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
38 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Harmonized neuropsychological assessment for neurocognitive disorders (NCDs) is an urgent priority in clinics. Neuropsychology assessments in NCDs seldom include tests exploring social cognitive skills. In 2022, we launched the SIGNATURE initiative to optimize socio-cognitive assessment in NCDs. Here, we report findings from the first initiative phase, including consortium creation and evaluation of the state of the art in socio-cognitive assessment in memory clinics. We developed an ad hoc online survey to explore practices and measures, relevance, and obstacles preventing the use of socio-cognitive testing in clinics. The survey was distributed within the SIGNATURE network. National coordinators were identified to disseminate the survey to local collaborators and scientific societies active in the field of dementia and/or neuropsychology. Data were analysed in aggregate form and stratified by geographical area and variables of interest. Four hundred and thirteen (413) responses from 10 European and Latin American geographical regions were recorded. Responders were balanced between physicians and psychologists. Seventy-eight (78) % of respondents reported no/limited experience with socio-cognitive measures; more than 85% agreed on their relevance in clinics. Ekman-60 faces was the most well-known and/or used task, followed by the Faux-Pas and Reading-the-Mind-in-the-Eyes tests. Lack of clinical measures, assessment time, guidelines, and education/training were reported as main obstacles. Real-life barriers prevent the adoption of socio-cognitive testing in clinics. Bidirectional collaboration between clinicians and researchers is required to address clinical needs and constraints and facilitate consistent socio-cognitive assessment.
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.