Specificity and Durability of Changes in Auditory Processing Efficiency After Targeted Cognitive Training in Individuals With Recent-Onset Psychosis
BackgroundWe previously demonstrated that the high heterogeneity of response to computerized Auditory Training (AT) in psychosis can be ascribed to individual differences in sensory processing efficiency and neural plasticity. In particular, we showed that Auditory Processing Speed (APS) serves as a...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2020-08-01
|
| Series: | Frontiers in Psychiatry |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00857/full |
| _version_ | 1818406288237789184 |
|---|---|
| author | Bruno Biagianti Bruno Biagianti Melissa Fisher Rachel Loewy Benjamin Brandrett Catalina Ordorica Kristin LaCross Brandon Schermitzler Michelle McDonald Ian Ramsay Sophia Vinogradov |
| author_facet | Bruno Biagianti Bruno Biagianti Melissa Fisher Rachel Loewy Benjamin Brandrett Catalina Ordorica Kristin LaCross Brandon Schermitzler Michelle McDonald Ian Ramsay Sophia Vinogradov |
| author_sort | Bruno Biagianti |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | BackgroundWe previously demonstrated that the high heterogeneity of response to computerized Auditory Training (AT) in psychosis can be ascribed to individual differences in sensory processing efficiency and neural plasticity. In particular, we showed that Auditory Processing Speed (APS) serves as a behavioral measure of target engagement, with faster speed predicting greater transfer effects to untrained cognitive domains. Here, we investigate whether the ability of APS to function as a proxy for target engagement is unique to AT, or if it applies to other training interventions, such as Executive Functioning Training (EFT). Additionally, we examine whether changes in APS are durable after these two forms of training.MethodsOne hundred and twenty-five participants with Recent Onset Psychosis (ROP) were randomized to AT (n = 66) and EFT (n = 59), respectively. APS was captured at baseline, after treatment, and at 6-month follow-up. Mixed models repeated measures analysis with restricted maximum likelihood was used to examine whether training condition differentiated APS trajectories. Within-group correlational analyses were used to study the relationship between APS and performance improvements in each of the training exercises.ResultsThe two groups were matched for age, gender, education, and baseline APS. Participants showed high inter-individual variability in APS at each time point. The mixed model showed a significant effect of time (F = 5.99, p = .003) but not a significant group-by-time effect (F = .73, p = .48). This was driven by significant APS improvements AT patients after treatment (d = .75) that were maintained after 6 months (d = .63). Conversely, in EFT patients, APS improvements did not reach statistical significance after treatment (p = .33) or after 6 months (p = .24). In AT patients, baseline APS (but not APS change) highly predicted peak performance for each training exercise (all r’s >.42).ConclusionsParticipant-specific speed in processing basic auditory stimuli greatly varies in ROP, and strongly influences the magnitude of response to auditory but not executive functioning training. Importantly, enhanced auditory processing efficiency persists 6 months after AT, suggesting the durability of neuroplasticity processes induced by this form of training. Future studies should aim to identify markers of target engagement and durability for cognitive training interventions that target sensory modalities beyond the auditory domain. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-14T09:09:33Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-781d5a0e69a34c4fa973cfa54c826834 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1664-0640 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-14T09:09:33Z |
| publishDate | 2020-08-01 |
| publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Frontiers in Psychiatry |
| spelling | doaj.art-781d5a0e69a34c4fa973cfa54c8268342022-12-21T23:08:36ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Psychiatry1664-06402020-08-011110.3389/fpsyt.2020.00857543630Specificity and Durability of Changes in Auditory Processing Efficiency After Targeted Cognitive Training in Individuals With Recent-Onset PsychosisBruno Biagianti0Bruno Biagianti1Melissa Fisher2Rachel Loewy3Benjamin Brandrett4Catalina Ordorica5Kristin LaCross6Brandon Schermitzler7Michelle McDonald8Ian Ramsay9Sophia Vinogradov10Department of R&D, Posit Science Corporation, San Francisco, CA, United StatesDepartment of Pathophysiology and Transplantation, University of Milan, Milan, ItalyDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United StatesDepartment of Psychiatry, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United StatesDivision of Psychology & Language Sciences, University College LondonDepartment of Psychiatry, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United StatesDepartment of Psychiatry, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United StatesDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United StatesDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United StatesDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United StatesDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United StatesBackgroundWe previously demonstrated that the high heterogeneity of response to computerized Auditory Training (AT) in psychosis can be ascribed to individual differences in sensory processing efficiency and neural plasticity. In particular, we showed that Auditory Processing Speed (APS) serves as a behavioral measure of target engagement, with faster speed predicting greater transfer effects to untrained cognitive domains. Here, we investigate whether the ability of APS to function as a proxy for target engagement is unique to AT, or if it applies to other training interventions, such as Executive Functioning Training (EFT). Additionally, we examine whether changes in APS are durable after these two forms of training.MethodsOne hundred and twenty-five participants with Recent Onset Psychosis (ROP) were randomized to AT (n = 66) and EFT (n = 59), respectively. APS was captured at baseline, after treatment, and at 6-month follow-up. Mixed models repeated measures analysis with restricted maximum likelihood was used to examine whether training condition differentiated APS trajectories. Within-group correlational analyses were used to study the relationship between APS and performance improvements in each of the training exercises.ResultsThe two groups were matched for age, gender, education, and baseline APS. Participants showed high inter-individual variability in APS at each time point. The mixed model showed a significant effect of time (F = 5.99, p = .003) but not a significant group-by-time effect (F = .73, p = .48). This was driven by significant APS improvements AT patients after treatment (d = .75) that were maintained after 6 months (d = .63). Conversely, in EFT patients, APS improvements did not reach statistical significance after treatment (p = .33) or after 6 months (p = .24). In AT patients, baseline APS (but not APS change) highly predicted peak performance for each training exercise (all r’s >.42).ConclusionsParticipant-specific speed in processing basic auditory stimuli greatly varies in ROP, and strongly influences the magnitude of response to auditory but not executive functioning training. Importantly, enhanced auditory processing efficiency persists 6 months after AT, suggesting the durability of neuroplasticity processes induced by this form of training. Future studies should aim to identify markers of target engagement and durability for cognitive training interventions that target sensory modalities beyond the auditory domain.https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00857/fullcognitive trainingneuroplasticitytarget engagementearly psychosispersonalized medicine |
| spellingShingle | Bruno Biagianti Bruno Biagianti Melissa Fisher Rachel Loewy Benjamin Brandrett Catalina Ordorica Kristin LaCross Brandon Schermitzler Michelle McDonald Ian Ramsay Sophia Vinogradov Specificity and Durability of Changes in Auditory Processing Efficiency After Targeted Cognitive Training in Individuals With Recent-Onset Psychosis Frontiers in Psychiatry cognitive training neuroplasticity target engagement early psychosis personalized medicine |
| title | Specificity and Durability of Changes in Auditory Processing Efficiency After Targeted Cognitive Training in Individuals With Recent-Onset Psychosis |
| title_full | Specificity and Durability of Changes in Auditory Processing Efficiency After Targeted Cognitive Training in Individuals With Recent-Onset Psychosis |
| title_fullStr | Specificity and Durability of Changes in Auditory Processing Efficiency After Targeted Cognitive Training in Individuals With Recent-Onset Psychosis |
| title_full_unstemmed | Specificity and Durability of Changes in Auditory Processing Efficiency After Targeted Cognitive Training in Individuals With Recent-Onset Psychosis |
| title_short | Specificity and Durability of Changes in Auditory Processing Efficiency After Targeted Cognitive Training in Individuals With Recent-Onset Psychosis |
| title_sort | specificity and durability of changes in auditory processing efficiency after targeted cognitive training in individuals with recent onset psychosis |
| topic | cognitive training neuroplasticity target engagement early psychosis personalized medicine |
| url | https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00857/full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT brunobiagianti specificityanddurabilityofchangesinauditoryprocessingefficiencyaftertargetedcognitivetraininginindividualswithrecentonsetpsychosis AT brunobiagianti specificityanddurabilityofchangesinauditoryprocessingefficiencyaftertargetedcognitivetraininginindividualswithrecentonsetpsychosis AT melissafisher specificityanddurabilityofchangesinauditoryprocessingefficiencyaftertargetedcognitivetraininginindividualswithrecentonsetpsychosis AT rachelloewy specificityanddurabilityofchangesinauditoryprocessingefficiencyaftertargetedcognitivetraininginindividualswithrecentonsetpsychosis AT benjaminbrandrett specificityanddurabilityofchangesinauditoryprocessingefficiencyaftertargetedcognitivetraininginindividualswithrecentonsetpsychosis AT catalinaordorica specificityanddurabilityofchangesinauditoryprocessingefficiencyaftertargetedcognitivetraininginindividualswithrecentonsetpsychosis AT kristinlacross specificityanddurabilityofchangesinauditoryprocessingefficiencyaftertargetedcognitivetraininginindividualswithrecentonsetpsychosis AT brandonschermitzler specificityanddurabilityofchangesinauditoryprocessingefficiencyaftertargetedcognitivetraininginindividualswithrecentonsetpsychosis AT michellemcdonald specificityanddurabilityofchangesinauditoryprocessingefficiencyaftertargetedcognitivetraininginindividualswithrecentonsetpsychosis AT ianramsay specificityanddurabilityofchangesinauditoryprocessingefficiencyaftertargetedcognitivetraininginindividualswithrecentonsetpsychosis AT sophiavinogradov specificityanddurabilityofchangesinauditoryprocessingefficiencyaftertargetedcognitivetraininginindividualswithrecentonsetpsychosis |