A Comparative Analysis of Neurocognitive Function in Community- and Hospital-Based Patients With Schizophrenia

Seri Maeng; Hee Seon Kim; Tae Joo Lee; Hoon Jung Koo; Won-Hyoung Kim

doi:10.30773/pi.2024.0077

Psychiatry Investig > Volume 21(10); 2024 > Article

Maeng, Kim, Lee, Koo, and Kim: A Comparative Analysis of Neurocognitive Function in Community- and Hospital-Based Patients With Schizophrenia

Original Article

Psychiatry Investigation 2024;21(10):1110-1119.

Published online: October 17, 2024

DOI: https://doi.org/10.30773/pi.2024.0077

A Comparative Analysis of Neurocognitive Function in Community- and Hospital-Based Patients With Schizophrenia

Seri Maeng¹

, Hee Seon Kim¹

, Tae Joo Lee²

, Hoon Jung Koo³

, Won-Hyoung Kim¹

¹Department of Psychiatry and Mental Health, College of Medicine, Inha University, Incheon, Republic of Korea

²Gonggam Psychiatric Clinic, Incheon, Republic of Korea

³College of Psychology and Child, Hanshin University, Osan, Republic of Korea

Correspondence: Won-Hyoung Kim, MD, PhD Department of Psychiatry and Mental Health, College of Medicine, Inha University, 27 Inhang-ro, Jung-gu, Incheon 22332, Republic of Korea Tel: +82-32-890-3880, Fax: +82-32-890-3558, E-mail: ckgodman@inha.ac.kr

Received March 4, 2024 Revised June 13, 2024 Accepted July 14, 2024

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Objective

The study compared differences in various neurocognitive characteristics across treatment modalities among schizophrenia patients recruited in one city between July 2020 and June 2023 who were on regular medication.

Methods

Of the 151 participants, 113 were included in the analysis. Participants were divided into community-based and hospital-based groups, and their demographics and clinical characteristics, including insight, quality of life, positive and negative symptoms, and personal and social functioning, were examined. In addition, several aspects of cognition were assessed using neurocognitive assessments such as the Trail Making Test (TMT), Stroop test, and Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST). After adjusting for age differences between groups, the final analysis included data from 42 participants in the community-based group and 33 participants in the hospital-based group.

Results

Hospital-based group participants completed Stroop-W more rapidly, excelled in Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Test recall and recognition, and incurred fewer TMT Part B (TMT-B) and Stroop-C errors. Additionally, they outperformed in WCST total, non-persistent errors, and categories completed. Contrastingly, community-based group participants showed superior outcomes in WCST persistent responses and errors, suggesting specific neurocognitive strengths.

Conclusion

We found differences in neurocognitive characteristics between the two groups. These differences were consistent across a range of cognitive domains, including attention, visual discrimination, memory, and executive functioning. Further large-scale study is needed to generalize cognitive characteristics across treatment modalities.

Keywords: Schizophrenia, Neurocognition, Cognitive test

INTRODUCTION

Schizophrenia is a mental illness that usually occurs in adolescence and early adulthood and can last a lifetime. The longer treatment intervention is delayed after the onset of schizophrenia, the greater the individual suffering and societal costs, and the poorer the prognosis [1,2]. Schizophrenia is diagnosed when there is a marked decline in social functioning based on positive symptoms such as delusions and hallucinations [3]. In addition, it is difficult to ignore the fact that a wide range of cognitive deficits are found before and after the onset of schizophrenia [4]. Understanding the cognitive features of schizophrenia is crucial, given that the negative symptoms and cognitive problems of schizophrenia patients lead to problems with interpersonal relationships, work, and adjustment in the real world [5].

Cognitive function refers to a wide range of human mental processes and can be categorized into neurocognitive and social cognitive functions [6]. Neurocognitive functions are represented by intelligence and include psychomotor speed, attention, memory, inhibition, executive function, etc [7]. Social cognition is a set of cognitive activities that perceive, understand, and process social information. It includes concepts such as theory of mind, emotional processing, social cognition and perception, and attribution. Currently, human cognition is understood to be an interplay of neurocognitive and social cognition that affects an individual’s life, and cognitive deficits in schizophrenia are strongly linked to occupational and functional impairment. In this study, we aimed to explore the neurocognitive functioning of schizophrenia patients [6].

People with schizophrenia have various life trajectories due to the lifelong nature of the disease. The course of schizophrenia and treatment outcomes are known to be variable and difficult to explain by a single predictor [2]. While some patients recover completely, the majority of people diagnosed with schizophrenia require formal or informal daily support [3]. As a result, patients choose different forms of treatment, including outpatient treatment, inpatient treatment, day hospitals, and psychiatric rehabilitation facilities [8]. These differences will be determined by a number of factors, including the patient’s daily lifestyle, access to care, and cost. Hospital-based treatment is typically intensive and provides specialized care. However, it can be expensive and inaccessible to all patients. Conversely, community-based care can help patients maintain social functioning because they are treated while maintaining as much of their daily routine as possible. It also has the advantage of providing comprehensive support, including housing, employment, and social services in addition to mental health support [9,10].

Numerous studies have previously reported that treatment course, medication adherence [11], or duration of illness [12] may contribute to clinical differences and differences in neurocognitive functioning. However, differences in objective cognitive functioning across schizophrenia treatment modalities have rarely been systematically studied. We predicted that differences in clinical and neurocognitive characteristics of individuals across treatment modalities would be observed in patients with schizophrenia who were continuously managed with pharmacotherapy, and assessed the functioning of various clinical assessments and domains of neurocognitive functioning.

METHODS

Participants

From July 2020 to June 2023, patients with schizophrenia registered at community mental health centers, social rehabilitation facilities, a university hospital, and a local psychiatric clinic in Incheon, South Korea, were recruited. Participants were recruited for a study of behavioral activation treatment for improving negative symptoms in the schizophrenia population. Both groups of patients were outpatients who continued to receive regular monitoring and medication prescriptions without being hospitalized. A total of 151 subjects were recruited, of which 2 refused to participate in the study and 36 were excluded based on the study inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the remaining 113 were assigned to the study analysis (Figure 1).

The inclusion criteria were as follows: 1) adults aged 18 to 65 years, 2) with a primary diagnosis of schizophrenia, and 3) stable on prescribed antipsychotic medication for at least 6 months. Exclusion criteria were 1) a history of organic brain syndrome, traumatic brain injury, or epilepsy, 2) mental retardation, 3) comorbid disorders such as current alcohol or other drug dependence, 4) a score of 5 or higher on at least two of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) positive symptom items, 5) a diagnosis of major depressive disorder, and 6) a risk of self-harm or harm to others. Of these, participants were categorized into two groups: hospital-based and community-based. Both groups were receiving regular medication, but participants in the community-based group were receiving additional services provided by the psychiatric rehabilitation facility, such as individual or group counseling, vocational rehabilitation programs, life skills training, and family support programs.

Clinical assessments were conducted at seven community mental health centers, a university hospital, and a psychiatric clinic in Incheon, South Korea. Most of the study participants were assessed at the psychiatric clinic and the hospital. For those who had difficulty accessing healthcare, evaluators visited each center. The assessment included a diagnostic interview with a psychiatrist (approximately 30 minutes), a psychiatric interview assessment that included levels of psychosocial functioning (approximately 50 minutes), neurocognitive testing (approximately 60 minutes), and a self-report survey assessing depression, anxiety, and insight (approximately 20 minutes). The assessments were administered under the supervision of one psychiatrist and one clinical psychologist.

All participants were fully informed about the study and provided written informed consent prior to participation. This study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board (INHA 2021-01-026).

Measures

Clinical scales

Korean version of the Revised Insight Scale for Psychosis

The Insight Scale for Psychosis (ISP) is a self-report measure of multifaceted insight into psychosis developed by Marková et al. [13] Participants respond yes or no to 30 items, with higher scores indicating greater insight. In this study, we used the standardized Korean version of the Revised Insight Scale for Psychosis (KISP) [14].

Schizophrenia Quality of Life Scale

The Schizophrenia Quality of Life Scale (SQLS) is a tool to assess subjective quality of life in people with schizophrenia. It is a self-report measure that consists of disease-specific items that reflect the daily life of a person with schizophrenia. There are 33 items in total, and a higher score indicates a lower quality of life. In this study, we used the standardized Korean version of the SQLS [15].

PANSS

The PANSS is a clinician-rated scale developed to comprehensively assess the severity of psychotic symptoms [16]. It consists of 30 questions (7 questions each for positive and negative symptoms and 16 questions for general psychopathology) and is rated on a 7-point Likert scale according to the severity of symptoms. In this study, we used the Korean version of the PANSS, which was standardized for Korean schizophrenia patients [17].

Clinical Assessment for Negative Symptoms

The Clinical Assessment for Negative Symptoms (CAINS) was developed to assess the severity of negative symptoms in patients with schizophrenia by overcoming the limitations of existing scales and reflecting new trends in negative symptoms [18]. It consists of a total of 13 items, and the subscales consist of 9 items for ‘motivation and pleasure’ and 4 items for ‘expression’. This study used the Korean version of the CAINS adapted by Jung et al. [19].

Personal and Social Performance scale

The Personal and Social Performance scale (PSP) was developed to assess the level of daily social functioning of patients, compensating for the shortcomings of existing scales which did not account for functional status unrelated to psychological stress [20]. It evaluates socially valuable behaviors including occupational activities and learning, interpersonal and social relationships, self-care, and the absence of disruptive or aggressive behaviors. These domains are divided into four subscales, A, B, C, and D, each rated on a 6-point scale. Subsequently, the evaluator synthesizes the degree of impairment in each domain to score a final result between 1 and 100, with higher scores indicating better functioning. This study employed the standardized Korean version of the Personal and Social Performance scale (K-PSP) [21].

Neurocognitive assessments

Trail Making Test

The Trail Making Test (TMT) is included in the Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychological Battery and is comprised of two parts, Part A and Part B, each assessing different cognitive functions [22]. Part A (TMT-A) measures sustained attention and psychomotor speed, while Part B (TMT-B) is used to evaluate executive functions associated with the frontal lobe, specifically mental shifting [22]. In this study, TMT-A was utilized to assess attention and working memory, and TMT-B served as an index for the evaluation of executive functions.

Stroop test

The Stroop test assesses one aspect of frontal function, which involves the suppression of habitual responses (e.g., reading words) while selectively attending to stimuli required for the task, specifically inhibition and selective attention [23]. In this study, the word reading condition (Stroop-W) was used to assess attention, and the color-word reading condition (Stroop-C) was used to evaluate frontal executive functions. Raw scores for correct responses and errors for each condition were included in the data analysis.

Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Test

The Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Test (RCFT) is designed to evaluate visuospatial constructional ability and visual memory [24]. The test is administered in the sequence of copy, immediately recall, delayed recall, and recognition. The copy phase assesses visuoperception, spatial organizational ability, and the capacity for organization. The immediately recall phase evaluates the encoding ability of memory, and delayed recall assesses the retention and retrieval abilities of memory. This study utilized the original scoring criteria proposed by Meyers and Meyers [24] for the assessment and scoring of each phase, and these raw scores were incorporated into the data analysis.

Controlled Oral Word Association test

The Controlled Oral Word Association test is a measure of verbal fluency that includes subtests for semantic or category fluency and phonemic or letter fluency [25]. Phonemic fluency is more closely associated with frontal lobe function [26], while semantic fluency outcomes are known to be related to temporal lobe function [27].

Wisconsin Card Sorting Test

The Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST) serves as a representative tool for measuring frontal lobe function, assessing complex abilities such as the acquisition of abstract information for concept formation, mental set shifting, and perseveration. In this study, the computerized version of the WCST, as outlined by Heaton et al. [28], was administered, and the raw scores of each item were utilized for data analysis.

Statistical analyses

All data collected in this study were analyzed using IBM SPSS 23.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Inter-rater reliability and internal consistency of self-report measures were analyzed using Cronbach’s α. Descriptive statistics were used to determine the demographic characteristics of the study population.

To analyze differences between groups, independent t-tests were used for continuous variables and chi-square tests for categorical variables. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was performed to analyze differences in the results of each cognitive function test. Ranked ANCOVA was used for variables that did not meet the assumption of equal variance. For the analysis of the 20-40 age group, we conducted an independent t-test without covariates. This decision was based on the lack of correlation between sex and cognitive test results found in the Pearson correlation analysis. Previous studies have also shown no significant difference in cognitive function between sex in the schizophrenia population [29].

Two-tailed analyses were performed, and p-values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Demographic characteristics

Table 1 shows the basic characteristics of the study participants. The mean age of the community-based patient group was 39.00 years (standard deviation [SD]=10.90), which was significantly lower than the mean age of the hospital-based patient group (mean=44.90 years, SD=11.44). In terms of sex, the community-based patients were 34 males (64.2%) and 19 females (35.8%), which was significantly different from the hospital-based patients (21 males: 35.0%, 39 females: 65.0%). In terms of marital status, both groups were predominantly single (49 community-based patients: 92.5%, 30 hospital-based patients: 50.0%), but the difference was statistically significant (Table 1).

It was considered that the age difference between the two groups might affect clinical variables, including cognitive function. Therefore, re-analysis was done taking into account the age variable, and the results of 42 community-based patients and 33 hospital-based patients were included in the analysis. No significant differences were observed between the two groups, except that the proportion of single marital status was 40 (95.2%) in the community-based patient group and 23 (69.7%) in the hospital-based patient group (Table 2).

Clinical characteristics

Table 3 shows a comparison of clinical features between the two groups. Patients in the community-based group reported a significantly higher quality of life score with a SQLS of 48.76 (SD=20.46) than patients in the hospital-based group (37.14, SD=23.16). On the PANSS, the community-based group had a positive symptom scale of 13.62 (SD=4.24), which was significantly higher than the hospital-based group (11.39, SD=2.98). However, no significant differences were observed between the two groups on the PANSS total score, negative symptom score, or general psychopathology score. The total score of K-PSP was significantly lower in the community-based group at 46.90 (SD=12.39) compared to the hospital-based group (54.24, SD=13.00). However, on the K-PSP personal and social relationships (B) subscale, patients in the community-based group scored significantly higher at 4.17 (SD=0.76) compared to the hospital-based group (3.70, SD=0.77) (Table 3).

Neurocognitive assessment

Table 4 compares neurocognitive functions between the two groups. On the Stroop-W, there was a significant difference in time to complete the test, with the hospital-based group being faster. On the RCFT, the hospital-based group performed better on the immediate recall and recognition subscales. On the TMT-B, significant differences were found in the number of errors, with fewer errors in the hospital-based group. Significant difference in errors with the hospital-based group making fewer errors on the Stroop-C. The statistical significance observed for the total number of errors, non-persistent errors, and number of categories completed on the WCST indicates that the hospital-based group performed better. However, on the persistent responses and persistent errors subscales of the WCST, the scores for the community-based group were significantly lower, indicating higher performance (Table 4).

DISCUSSION

It is well established that negative symptoms and cognitive functioning are more closely related to the course and prognosis of schizophrenia than positive symptoms [30-32]. Patients with schizophrenia show a complex cognitive decline [33-35], which is also associated with prognosis [33]. However, compared to positive symptoms, cognitive functioning is difficult to measure, and there are limitations to the use of uniform measurement tools. At the “Deconstructing Psychosis,” [36] there was discussion of including cognitive functioning in the diagnostic criteria for schizophrenia, as well as the Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia [37] initiative to systematically address cognitive functioning and negative symptoms. Ultimately, these discussions were not reflected in the current Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, but understanding cognitive functioning in people with schizophrenia will play an important role in predicting course and prognosis and improving the quality of life for patients.

We wanted to determine whether there were specific differences between patients using relatively accessible health facilities in the community (community-based group) and those using tertiary hospitals (hospital-based group). However, it was confirmed that there was no significant difference in educational attainment or premorbid intellectual level other than age or marital status. Therefore, we wanted to standardize age and examine whether there were differences in neurocognitive function characteristics within each group.

In our study, the community-based patient group rated their quality of life lower than the hospital-based patient group. The community-based group was observed to have more positive symptoms and lower functional status in daily living as assessed by the K-PSP compared to the hospital-based group. In a previous study of inpatient and outpatient schizophrenia patients in Portugal [38], the authors found that, although outpatients showed higher PSP total scores as compared with inpatients, these differences were not statistically significant. In our study, the subscale personal and social relationships (B) of the K-PSP was higher in the community-based patient group, but this was contrary to the total score, which is a composite assessment of the degree of impairment in the four subscales. This suggests that community-based group patients may score higher on interpersonal and social relationships because they live in a psychiatric residential facility or have more frequent exposure to group therapy, but this does not reflect their level of personal functioning. On the PANSS and CAINS scales, which measure the severity of illness-specific symptoms of schizophrenia, there were no statistically significant differences between the groups except for the PANSS positive symptom scale. The community-based group scored higher on the PANSS positive symptom scale than the hospital-based group. A study by Okasha et al. [38] compared clinical characteristics and neurocognitive function between long-term inpatient and outpatient groups for schizophrenia, and found that PANSS positive symptoms and general symptoms were significantly correlated with cognitive function. In our study, no statistical significance was observed between the two groups in the PANSS total score, negative symptom score, and general psychopathology score, but the community-based group showed significantly higher scores in PANSS positive symptoms. There is a possibility that the difference in the level of positive symptoms between the two groups affected neurocognitive function, but different results were also confirmed for each item of neurocognitive assessments. Our results are partly consistent with previous research, but partly inconsistent with them.

There were no significant differences in negative symptoms between the two groups on either the PANSS or CAINS scales. It has been previously reported that schizophrenia patients with severe negative symptoms may perform worse on cognitive tasks, particularly executive function, memory, and attention [5,39]. The authors speculate that this may be because voice symptoms affect the motivation and attention required to perform cognitive tasks. However, statistical significance was found on neurocognitive assessments despite the fact that the two groups compared in our study did not differ in levels of negative symptoms. The hospital-based group was rated as more alert on the Stroop-W time items compared to the community-based group. This is related to attention and information processing speed, suggesting that patients in the hospital-based group are better able to process and suppress cognitive interference than those in the community-based group. Previous studies have also shown increased Stroop interference in people with schizophrenia [40]. The Stroop interference effect refers to the relative increase in reaction time observed when word meaning and stimulus color are incongruent, and increased Stroop interference predicts difficulty processing everyday behavioral information and deficits in behavioral control. However, the results are not consistent across studies, as some studies have shown that the Stroop effect is not increased in people with schizophrenia [41]. In addition, the immediate recall and recognition items of the RCFT were significantly higher in the hospital-based group. The immediate recall item of the RCFT estimates an individual’s visual memory and visual organization ability, and the recognition item assesses visual discrimination and attention by evaluating how accurately the individual recognizes and distinguishes shapes. It can be interpreted that patients in the hospital-based group had better attention span compared to the community-based group, which is consistent with the results of the Stroop-W. The TMT-B and Stroop-C, which were administered to assess executive function, also showed better functioning in the hospital-based group on some items. The error items on the TMT-B and the error items on the Stroop-C reflect deficits in attention and executive functioning, suggesting that the community-based group is less able to concentrate and adapt effectively to new information or situations in daily life. On the WCST, another tool used to assess executive function, the hospital-based group performed better on the total number of errors, non-perseverative errors, and number of categories completed items. However, patients in the community-based group performed better on perseverative responses and perseverative errors. In a previous study assessing cognitive characteristics of patients with schizophrenia using the WCST [42], patients with schizophrenia succeeded on fewer categories, committed more perseverative errors, made more perseverative responses, and gave significantly lower conceptual level responses than the controls. However, on retest, patients with schizophrenia committed significantly fewer perseverative errors. The authors interpreted these results as suggesting that even patients with schizophrenia who have reduced frontal lobe function can partially overcome this deficit with verbal reinforcement. In our study, the community-based group was relatively consistent with these previous findings.

This is contrary to our overall findings, as the various cognitive rehabilitation services that individuals receive in community programs aim to improve attention, memory, and executive function and are known to be effective in improving cognitive function [43,44]. However, in a quantitative analysis of cognitive rehabilitation programs for schizophrenia, Krabbendam and Aleman [45] found no statistically significant effectiveness. The community-based patients in our study were more likely to be living in a psychiatric rehabilitation residence for longer periods of time and to have more time devoted to education about their mental illness. In contrast, hospital-based patients were likely to have more time spent on more routine activities outside of regular hospital care. Therefore, it is possible that the experience of more realistic forms of daily living adaptation may have been a stimulus for maintaining attention and executive function. Conversely, however, it is also possible that individuals with greater ability to adapt to daily living may have opted for regular outpatient visits for simple medication rather than psychiatric rehabilitation. Davidson et al.’s study [46] suggests that cognitive impairment is a cause of long-term hospitalization, rather than the notion that cognitive impairment itself is a secondary consequence of long-term hospitalization.

The strength of this study is that it assessed different cognitive characteristics between groups of people with schizophrenia across treatment modalities using a variety of objective tools. It is important to understand the environmental influence of treatment modality on cognitive functioning in people with schizophrenia as it directly affects their daily functioning, independence, and quality of life. It is important to note that our study was age-adjusted to identify treatment modality-specific cognitive characteristics in younger patients with schizophrenia, in their 20s and 30s, given that previous studies [47,48] have observed greater impairments in cognitive functioning, especially abstract thinking, as patients with schizophrenia age. The 20s and 30s are the prime years for the onset of schizophrenia, and early intervention based on an understanding of cognitive functioning during this period may contribute to long-term improvements in patients’ symptoms and social and occupational functioning.

This study has several limitations. First, we did not ensure homogeneity between groups. We categorized the groups into those receiving medication through outpatient treatment and those receiving other ancillary psychiatric rehabilitation services, but even within the community-based group, there was a mix of treatment modalities, including residential psychiatric rehabilitation, day hospitals, and case management with local public services. This study was also limited by the small number of participants, so future studies should analyze the treatment type in detail to observe more clear group characteristics. Second, because the subjects were recruited from patients who visited one university hospital and one local psychiatric clinic in one region of Korea and were prescribed medication, the study population was small and cannot reflect the characteristics of the entire schizophrenia patient group. Therefore, future studies should be conducted with larger populations in different regions to see if the same results are replicated. Third, some patients failed to perform the TMT-B screening tool, and subjects who failed to perform the test were excluded from the analysis. There were two dropouts in the hospital-based group, compared to eight dropouts in the community-based group. It is possible that subjects with relatively high cognitive deficits were excluded from the assessment, which is a limitation of the study that makes it difficult to characterize the overall schizophrenia population. Lastly, recent studies have reported associations between insight level and neurocognitive deficits [49,50]. In our study, we found no significant difference in the level of insight between the two groups, which differed in a range of neurocognitive functions. This can be attributed to the limitation that the KISP scale relies on self-report questionnaires, which can be influenced by the patient’s subjective interpretation and current mental state.

Despite these limitations, our study is meaningful because it compares differences in cognitive characteristics across treatment modalities in young schizophrenia patients using a variety of neurocognitive measures. Future large-scale studies examining neurocognitive characteristics by treatment modality and analyzing their correlations will expand our understanding of cognitive characteristics of schizophrenia and contribute to the improvement of social and daily functioning in people with schizophrenia.

Notes

Availability of Data and Material

The datasets generated or analyzed during the study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: all authors. Data curation: Seri Maeng, Hee Seon Kim, Tae Joo Lee, Won-Hyoung Kim. Formal analysis: all authors. Funding acquisition: Tae Joo Lee, Hoon Jung Koo, Won-Hyoung Kim. Investigation: all authors. Methodology: Seri Maeng, Hee Seon Kim, Won-Hyoung Kim. Project administration: all authors. Resources: Seri Maeng, Tae Joo Lee, Won-Hyoung Kim. Software: Hee Seon Kim, Tae Joo Lee. Supervision: Tae Joo Lee, Won-Hyoung Kim. Validation: Tae Joo Lee, Hoon Jung Koo, Won-Hyoung Kim. Visualization: Seri Maeng, Hee Seon Kim, Won- Hyoung Kim. Writing—original draft: Seri Maeng, Hee Seon Kim, Won- Hyoung Kim. Writing—review & editing: Seri Maeng, Won-Hyoung Kim.

Funding Statement

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) granted funded by the Ministry of Science, ICT & Future Planning (Grant number: NRF 2021R1G1A101146313). This work was supported by an INHA University Research Grant.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

None

Figure 1.

Flow diagram of participants’ recruitment.

Table 1.

Demographic characteristics in all participants (N=113)

	Community based group (N=53)	Hospital based group (N=60)	t or χ²	p
Age	39.00±10.90	44.90±11.44	-2.797	0.006^**
Sex
Men	34 (64.2)	21 (35.0)	9.572	0.002^**
Women	19 (35.8)	39 (65.0)
Education (yr)	12.40±2.73	12.35±2.83	0.088	0.930
Premorbid IQ^†	92.96±11.89	93.43±11.30	-0.215	0.830
Working
No	42 (79.2)	40 (66.7)	2.237	0.135
Yes	11 (20.8)	20 (33.3)
Marital
Single	49 (92.5)	30 (50.0)	24.847	<0.001^***
Married	2 (3.8)	24 (40.0)
Divorced	2 (3.8)	6 (10.0)
Alcohol
No	42 (79.2)	45 (75.0)	0.286	0.593
Yes	11 (20.8)	15 (25.0)
Smoking
No	30 (56.6)	40 (66.7)	1.209	0.272
Yes	23 (43.4)	20 (33.3)

Values are presented as mean±standard deviation or number (%) unless otherwise indicated.

^** p<0.01;

^*** p<0.001;

^† premorbid IQ was calculated using the algorithm of the Korea Premorbid Intelligence Estimate for K-Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-IV. IQ, intelligence quotient

Table 2.

Demographic characteristics in 20-40 years (N=75)

	Community based group (N=42)	Hospital based group (N=33)	t or χ²	p
Age	34.98±8.07	36.70±8.53	-0.894	0.374
Sex
Men	28 (66.7)	15 (45.5)	3.399	0.065
Women	14 (33.3)	18 (54.5)
Education (yr)	12.69±2.39	13.24±2.66	-0.944	0.348
Premorbid IQ^†	93.98±12.64	94.52±11.81	-0.323	0.747
Working
No	31 (73.8)	21 (63.6)	1.668	0.355
Yes	11 (26.2)	12 (36.4)
Marital
Single	40 (95.2)	23 (69.7)	9.421	0.009^**
Married	1 (2.4)	8 (24.2)
Divorced	1 (2.4)	2 (6.1)
Alcohol
No	33 (78.6)	23 (69.7)	0.769	0.380
Yes	9 (21.4)	10 (30.3)
Smoking
No	26 (61.9)	20 (60.6)	0.013	0.909
Yes	16 (38.1)	13 (39.4)

Values are presented as mean±standard deviation or number (%) unless otherwise indicated.

^** p<0.01;

^† premorbid IQ was calculated using the algorithm of the Korea Premorbid Intelligence Estimate for K-Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-IV.

IQ, intelligence quotient

Table 3.

Comparison of clinical data in 20-40 years (N=75)

	Community based group (N=42)	Hospital based group (N=33)	t	p
CES-D	20.55±17.76	16.79±19.79	0.865	0.390
STAI	47.14±12.30	43.03±14.55	1.326	0.189
KISP	15.14±5.58	13.48±6.84	1.129	0.263
SQLS	48.76±20.46	37.14±23.16	2.302	0.024^*
PANSS
Total	64.48±12.41	59.42±10.05	1.899	0.062
Positive	13.62±4.24	11.39±2.98	2.665	0.010^*
Negative	22.43±5.68	20.42±4.93	1.608	0.112
General psychopathology	28.43±6.82	27.61±5.99	0.546	0.586
CAINS
Total	35.17±7.93	35.21±8.55	-0.024	0.981
Motivation and Pleasure	25.67±5.40	26.00±5.92	-0.254	0.800
Expression	9.50±3.68	9.21±3.98	0.325	0.746
K-PSP
Socially useful activities (A)	3.90±0.98	3.53±1.16	1.495	0.139
Personal and social relationships (B)	4.17±0.76	3.70±0.77	2.637	0.010^*
Self-care (C)	3.19±0.94	2.82±0.88	1.745	0.085
Disturbing aggressive behaviors (D)	1.38±0.70	1.21±0.42	1.303	0.197
Total	46.90±12.39	54.24±13.00	-2.491	0.015^*

Values are presented as mean±standard deviation unless otherwise indicated.

^* p<0.05.

CES-D, Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale; STAI, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-1; KISP, Korean version of the Revised Insight Scale for Psychosis; SQLS, Schizophrenia Quality of Life Scale; PANSS, Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale; CAINS, Clinical Assessment for Negative Symptoms; K-PSP, Korean version of the Personal and Social Performance scale

Table 4.

Comparison of neurocognitive assessments in 20-40 years (N=75)

	Community based group (N=42)	Hospital based group (N=33)	t	p
TMT-A
Time	41.88±21.20	37.18±16.21	1.054	0.295
Errors	0.48±1.04	0.36±1.03	0.468	0.641
Stroop test: word reading
Corrects	109.90±10.17	110.73±6.43	-0.405	0.687
Errors	0.50±1.17	0.18±0.47	1.604	0.114
Time	86.10±20.85	69.30±14.52	4.104	<0.001^***
RCFT
Copy	30.37±6.59	32.20±6.51	-1.199	0.235
Immediately recall	10.69±6.61	15.08±10.71	-2.063	0.044^*
Delayed recall	11.10±6.79	14.77±10.41	-1.756	0.085
Recognition	5.26±3.83	7.06±2.57	-2.425	0.018^*
Controlled Oral Word Association test
Category fluency	30.24±9.18	32.39±7.31	-1.102	0.274
Letter fluency	25.45±12.47	30.00±10.43	-1.683	0.097
TMT-B^†
Time (centers N=34, hospital N=31)	121.53±49.41	105.54±56.65	1.215	0.229
Errors (centers N=34, hospital N=31)	1.65±1.61	0.61±1.17	2.974	0.004^**
Stroop test: color-word reading
Corrects	90.55±20.62	95.85±17.15	-1.189	0.238
Errors	1.76±2.51	0.58±0.97	2.811	0.007^**
Time	116.26±9.72	117.24±6.77	-0.493	0.624
WCST
Total number of correct	62.86±15.59	68.21±14.10	-1.539	0.128
Total number of errors	58.07±24.75	43.94±26.55	2.377	0.020^*
Perseverative responses	14.02±19.36	29.39±26.36	-2.912	0.005^**
Perseverative errors	11.71±15.57	24.94±19.93	-3.228	0.002^**
Non-perseverative errors	108.83±20.95	87.21±16.87	4.824	<0.001^***
Number of categories completed	2.79±2.18	3.91±2.16	-2.225	0.029^*
Trials to complete first category	36.50±37.85	26.03±28.74	1.361	0.178
Failure to maintain set	1.14±1.39	1.15±1.44	-0.026	0.979

Values are presented as mean±standard deviation unless otherwise indicated.

^* p<0.05;

^** p<0.01;

^*** p<0.001;

^† the subjects who failed the TMT-B are excluded from the analysis.

TMT-A, Trail Making Test Part A; RCFT, Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Test; TMT-B, Trail Making Test Part B; WCST, Wisconsin Card Sorting Test

REFERENCES

1. Knapp M, Simon J, Percudani M, Almond S. Economics of schizophrenia: a review. In: Maj M, Sartorius N, editor. Schizophrenia (2nd ed). West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2002, p. 413-488.

2. Norman RM, Malla AK, McLean T, Voruganti LP, Cortese L, McIntosh E, et al. The relationship of symptoms and level of functioning in schizophrenia to general wellbeing and the Quality of Life Scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2000;102:303-309.

3. Bruijnzeel D, Tandon R. The concept of schizophrenia: from the 1850s to the DSM-5. Psychiatr Ann 2011;41:289-295.

4. Kahn RS, Keefe RS. Schizophrenia is a cognitive illness: time for a change in focus. JAMA Psychiatry 2013;70:1107-1112.

5. Bowie CR, Depp C, McGrath JA, Wolyniec P, Mausbach BT, Thornquist MH, et al. Prediction of real-world functional disability in chronic mental disorders: a comparison of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Am J Psychiatry 2010;167:1116-1124.

6. Fett AK, Viechtbauer W, Dominguez MD, Penn DL, van Os J, Krabbendam L. The relationship between neurocognition and social cognition with functional outcomes in schizophrenia: a meta-analysis. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2011;35:573-588.

7. Corigliano V, De Carolis A, Trovini G, Dehning J, Di Pietro S, Curto M, et al. Neurocognition in schizophrenia: from prodrome to multi-episode illness. Psychiatry Res 2014;220:129-134.

8. Jeong YC. Psychosocial interventions for schizophrenia patients in the critical period. Seoul: Hakjisa; 2008.

9. Asher L, Patel V, De Silva MJ. Community-based psychosocial interventions for people with schizophrenia in low and middle-income countries: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Psychiatry 2017;17:355

10. Kim SY, Kim AR. Effectiveness of community-based interventions for patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders: a study protocol for a systematic review. Syst Rev 2021;10:106

11. Maeda K, Kasai K, Watanabe A, Henomatsu K, Rogers MA, Kato N. Effect of subjective reasoning and neurocognition on medication adherence for persons with schizophrenia. Psychiatr Serv 2006;57:1203-1205.

12. Kurtz MM. Neurocognitive impairment across the lifespan in schizophrenia: an update. Schizophr Res 2005;74:15-26.

13. Marková IS, Roberts KH, Gallagher C, Boos H, McKenna PJ, Berrios GE. Assessment of insight in psychosis: a re-standardization of a new scale. Psychiatry Res 2003;119:81-88.

14. Kim JH, Yim SJ, Yoon HJ. [Assessing the reliability and validity of the Korean version of the Revised Insight Scale for Psychosis (KISP)]. Korean J Schizophr Res 2004;7:15-22. Korean.

15. Kim JH, Yim SJ, Min SK, Kim SE, Son SJ, Wild DJ, et al. [The Korean version of 4th revision of schizophrenia quality of life scale: validation study and relationship with PANSS]. J Korean Neuropsychiatr Assoc 2006;45:401-410. Korean.

16. Kay SR, Fiszbein A, Opler LA. The positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS) for schizophrenia. Schizophr Bull 1987;13:261-276.

17. Yi JS, Ahn YM, Shin HK, An SK, Joo YH, Kim SH, et al. [Reliability and validity of the Korean version of the positive and negative syndrome scale]. J Korean Neuropsychiatr Assoc 2001;40:1090-1105. Korean.

18. Kring AM, Gur RE, Blanchard JJ, Horan WP, Reise SP. The clinical assessment interview for negative symptoms (CAINS): final development and validation. Am J Psychiatry 2013;170:165-172.

19. Jung SI, Woo J, Kim YT, Kwak SG. Validation of the Korean-version of the clinical assessment interview for negative symptoms of schizophrenia (CAINS). J Korean Med Sci 2016;31:1114-1120.

20. Morosini PL, Magliano L, Brambilla L, Ugolini S, Pioli R. Development, reliability and acceptability of a new version of the DSM-IV social and occupational runctioning assessment scale (SOFAS) to assess routine social functioning. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2000;101:323-329.

21. Lee JG, Seok JH, Lee JY, Lee KU, Kwak KH, Kwon JS, et al. [A Validation study of the Korean-version of the personal and social performance scale]. Korean J Psychopharmacol 2006;17:497-506. Korean.

22. Bowie CR, Harvey PD. Administration and interpretation of the trail making test. Nat Protoc 2006;1:2277-2281.

23. Kim TY, Kim S, Sohn JE, Lee EA, Yoo BG, Lee SC, et al. [Development of the Korean stroop test and study of the validity and the reliability]. J Korean Geriatr Soc 2004;8:233-240. Korean.

24. Meyers JE, Meyers KR. Rey complex figure test and recognition trial (RCFT). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources; 1995.

25. Ross TP, Calhoun E, Cox T, Wenner C, Kono W, Pleasant M. The reliability and validity of qualitative scores for the Controlled Oral Word Association Test. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 2007;22:475-488.

26. Leggio MG, Silveri MC, Petrosini L, Molinari M. Phonological grouping is specifically affected in cerebellar patients: a verbal fluency study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2000;69:102-106.

27. Pihlajamäki M, Tanila H, Hänninen T, Könönen M, Laakso M, Partanen K, et al. Verbal fluency activates the left medial temporal lobe: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Ann Neurol 2000;47:470-476.

28. Heaton RK, Chelune GJ, Talley JL, Kay GG, Curtiss G. Wisconsin card sorting test (WCST) manual: revised and expanded. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources; 1993.

29. Chen M, Zhang L, Jiang Q. Gender difference in cognitive function among stable schizophrenia: a network perspective. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat 2022;18:2991-3000.

30. Andreasen NC, Flaum M. Schizophrenia: the characteristic symptoms. Schizophr Bull 1991;17:27-49.

31. Pogue-Geile MF, Harrow M. Negative symptoms in schizophrenia: their longitudinal course and prognostic importance. Schizophr Bull 1985;11:427-439.

32. Möller HJ, Bottlender R, Gross A, Hoff P, Wittmann J, Wegner U, et al. The Kraepelinian dichotomy: preliminary results of a 15-year follow-up study on functional psychoses: focus on negative symptoms. Schizophr Res 2002;56:87-94.

33. Elvevåg B, Goldberg TE. Cognitive impairment in schizophrenia is the core of the disorder. Crit Rev Neurobiol 2000;14:1-21.

34. Keefe RS, Fenton WS. How should DSM-V criteria for schizophrenia include cognitive impairment? Schizophr Bull 2007;33:912-920.

35. Taylor MA, Abrams R. Cognitive impairment in schizophrenia. Am J Psychiatry 1984;141:196-201.

36. Tamminga CA, Sirovatka PJ, Regier DA, Van Os J. Deconstructing psychosis: refining the research agenda for DSM-V. Arlington: American Psychiatric Association; 2009.

37. Kirkpatrick B, Fenton WS, Carpenter WT Jr, Marder SR. The NIMH-MATRICS consensus statement on negative symptoms. Schizophr Bull 2006;32:214-219.

38. Okasha TA, Hussein H, Shorub E, Nagi H, Moustafa AA, El-Serafi D. Cognitive dysfunction among inpatients and outpatients with schizophrenia: relationship to positive and negative symptoms. Middle East Curr Psychiatry 2020;27:58

39. Brazo P, Delamillieure P, Morello R, Halbecq I, Marié RM, Dollfus S. Impairments of executive/attentional functions in schizophrenia with primary and secondary negative symptoms. Psychiatry Res 2005;133:45-55.

40. Henik A, Salo R. Schizophrenia and the stroop effect. Behav Cogn Neurosci Rev 2004;3:42-59.

41. Chen EY, Wong AW, Chen RY, Au JW. Stroop interference and facilitation effects in first-episode schizophrenic patients. Schizophr Res 2001;48:29-44.

42. Everett J, Lavoie K, Gagnon JF, Gosselin N. Performance of patients with schizophrenia on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST). J Psychiatry Neurosci 2001;26:123-130.

43. Kluwe-Schiavon B, Sanvicente-Vieira B, Kristensen CH, Grassi-Oliveira R. Executive functions rehabilitation for schizophrenia: a critical systematic review. J Psychiatr Res 2013;47:91-104.

44. Demily C, Franck N. Cognitive remediation: a promising tool for the treatment of schizophrenia. Expert Rev Neurother 2008;8:1029-1036.

45. Krabbendam L, Aleman A. Cognitive rehabilitation in schizophrenia: a quantitative analysis of controlled studies. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2003;169:376-382.

46. Davidson M, Harvey PD, Powchik P, Parrella M, White L, Knobler HY, et al. Severity of symptoms in chronically institutionalized geriatric schizophrenic patients. Am J Psychiatry 1995;152:197-207.

47. Fett AJ, Velthorst E, Reichenberg A, Ruggero CJ, Callahan JL, Fochtmann LJ, et al. Long-term changes in cognitive functioning in individuals with psychotic disorders: findings from the Suffolk County Mental Health Project. JAMA Psychiatry 2020;77:387-396.

48. Stirling J, White C, Lewis S, Hopkins R, Tantam D, Huddy A, et al. Neurocognitive function and outcome in first-episode schizophrenia: a 10-year follow-up of an epidemiological cohort. Schizophr Res 2003;65:75-86.

49. Aleman A, Agrawal N, Morgan KD, David AS. Insight in psychosis and neuropsychological function: meta-analysis. Br J Psychiatry 2006;189:204-212.

50. Lysaker PH, Dimaggio G, Buck KD, Callaway SS, Salvatore G, Carcione A, et al. Poor insight in schizophrenia: links between different forms of metacognition with awareness of symptoms, treatment need, and consequences of illness. Compr Psychiatry 2011;52:253-260.