Back

Distinct sensory profiles in early psychosis revealed by low-cost feature-specific visual and auditory psychophysical testing

de Bustamante Simas, M. L.; Lacerda, A. M.; Frutuoso, J. T.; de Almeida, I. F. P.; Monteiro de Gois Barros, M.; Souza da Silva, K. K.; Macambira da Silva, T.; Melo de Souza Ramos, G. B.; Lima da Silva, T.; Mocelin Ribeiro dos Santos, N.; Almeida Rodrigues e Silva, A.; de Siqueira, K. K.

2026-01-24 psychiatry and clinical psychology
10.64898/2026.01.20.26343778 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectiveCharacterization of psychosis typically relies on cognitive and behavioral assessments. This study suggests the use of feature-specific sensory experiments to detect subtle perceptual alterations in early psychosis. MethodsPatients (N=120) diagnosed with schizophrenia (SCHZ, N=45), bipolar disorder (BIP, N=36), or first-episode psychosis (FEP, N=39), recruited from public mental health facilities in Brazil, were compared with age-matched healthy controls (HCSCHZ, HCBIP, and HCFEP; pooled from N=94). Independent psychophysical measurements were obtained within each group. The Pictorial-Size-Test (PST) assessed pictorial size perception. Sound-Appreciation-Test (SAT) assessed auditory discomfort. ResultsSCHZ circled larger perceived sizes than HCSCHZ (power=95%, d=0.63, p<0.0001), FEP circled larger perceived sizes than HCFEP (power=99%, d=2.86, p<0.0001), but BIP did not perceive larger sizes than HCBIP in PST. SCHZ reported higher levels of discomfort than HCSCHZ (power=99%, d=1.29, p<0.0005), BIP reported higher levels of discomfort than HCBIP (power=99%, d=2.73, p<0.0001) and FEP reported higher levels of discomfort than HCFEP (power=99%, d=1.46, p<0.0003) on SAT. ConclusionsThe findings suggest that low-cost psychophysical measurements can provide information about sensory alterations in early psychosis revealing dissimilar patterns between schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Such patterns are not readily perceived by physician-patient interaction but may add to overall clinical judgement.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.