No abstract

Anhedonia, the reduced capacity to experience pleasure, has long been considered a prominent feature of schizophrenia spectrum disorders. Many domain-specific conceptualizations of anhedonia and pleasure capacity have been developed, and there currently exist a variety of self-report assessment tools that purport to assess these various domains. The current systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO: CRD42020156169) aimed to quantify overall and domain-specific self-reported anhedonia in people with schizophrenia compared to nonpsychiatric controls. We performed a literature search of PsycINFO, MEDLINE, and Embase databases for dissertations and peer-reviewed articles published in English prior to June 2021. Studies employing a psychometrically validated self-report measure of anhedonia, pleasure experience or affect in people with schizophrenia, schizoaffective, or schizophreniform disorders; studies utilizing at least one clearly defined healthy or community control group for comparison; and studies providing sufficient data to calculate effect sizes were included in this review. Random and mixed effects meta-analyses, meta-regressions, and subgroup comparisons were run across domains of anhedonia to explore weighted mean effect sizes and their associated moderators. In total, 146 studies met inclusion criteria, yielding 390 Hedges’ g effect sizes from the included comparisons. People with schizophrenia reported moderate-to-large elevations in overall and domain-specific anhedonia. A sensitivity analysis accounting for high risk of bias studies did not significantly impact results. Lastly, patient sex, education, negative symptom severity, antipsychotic class, and trait negative affect differentially moderated effect sizes across domains of anhedonia. Despite the heterogeneity inherent in schizophrenia spectrum disorders, self-reported anhedonia is ubiquitously reported across self-report measures in this population.

Background Aberrant brain insulin signaling has been posited to lie at the crossroads of several metabolic and cognitive disorders. Intranasal insulin (INI) is a non-invasive approach that allows investigation and modulation of insulin signaling in the brain while limiting peripheral side effects. Objectives The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the effects of INI on cognition in diverse patient populations and healthy individuals. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Cochrane CENTRAL were systematically searched from 2000 to July 2021. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials that studied the effects of INI on cognition. Two independent reviewers determined study eligibility and extracted relevant descriptive and outcome data. Results Twenty-nine studies (pooled N = 1,726) in healthy individuals as well as those with Alzheimer’s disease (AD)/mild cognitive impairment (MCI), mental health disorders, metabolic disorders, among others, were included in the quantitative meta-analysis. Patients with AD/MCI treated with INI were more likely to show an improvement in global cognition (SMD = 0.22, 95% CI: 0.05–0.38 p = <0.00001, N = 12 studies). Among studies with healthy individuals and other patient populations, no significant effects of INI were found for global cognition. Conclusions This review demonstrates that INI may be associated with pro-cognitive benefits for global cognition, specifically for individuals with AD/MCI. Further studies are required to better understand the neurobiological mechanisms and differences in etiology to dissect the intrinsic and extrinsic factors contributing to the treatment response of INI.