Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-5c569c448b-s84wp Total loading time: 0.991 Render date: 2022-07-03T00:33:25.890Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

Episodic memory-related activation in schizophrenia: meta-analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Amélie M. Achim
Affiliation:
Brain Imaging Group, Douglas Hospital Research Centre, Verdun, and Departments of Psychiatry and of Neurology and Neurosurgery, McGill University, Montreal, Québec, Canada
Martin Lepage*
Affiliation:
Brain Imaging Group, Douglas Hospital Research Centre, Verdun, and Departments of Psychiatry and of Neurology and Neurosurgery, McGill University, Montreal, Québec, Canada
*
Dr Martin Lepage, Douglas Hospital Research Centre – FBCI, 6875 Boulevard LaSalle, Verdun, Québec H4H 1R3, Canada. Tel: + 1 (514) 761 6131, ext. 4393; fax: +1 (514) 888 4064; e-mail: martin.lepage@mcgill.ca
Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background

Numerous studies have examined the neural correlates of episodic memory deficits in schizophrenia, yielding both consistencies and discrepancies in the reported patterns of results.

Aims

To identify in schizophrenia the brain regions in which activity is consistently abnormal across imaging studies of memory.

Method

Data from 18 studies meeting the inclusion criteria were combined using a recently developed quantitative meta-analytic approach.

Results

Regions of consistent differential activation between groups were observed in the left inferior prefrontal cortex, medial temporal cortex bilaterally, left cerebellum, and in other prefrontal and temporal lobe regions. Subsequent analyses explored memory encoding and retrieval separately and identified between-group differences in specific prefrontal and medial temporal lobe regions.

Conclusions

Beneath the apparent heterogeneity of published findings on schizophrenia and memory, a consistent and robust pattern of group differences is observed as a function of memory processes.

Type
Review Article
Copyright
Copyright © 2005 The Royal College of Psychiatrists 

Although several studies have been performed to assess the neural correlates of memory encoding and retrieval in schizophrenia, there is still no consensus on the specific brain regions that seem most affected. A new quantitative meta-analytic method is available for combining the results from different functional brain imaging studies (Reference Chein, Fissell and JacobsChein et al, 2002; Reference Turkeltaub, Eden and JonesTurkeltaub et al, 2002). This type of meta-analysis is theoretically and methodo-logically different from standard meta-analyses based on effect size (Reference Fox, Parsons and LancasterFox et al, 1998). In contrast to the typical pooling of effect sizes from different studies, this new technique assesses whether the peaks of activation reported in different studies are significantly clustered (agglomerated) in certain brain regions. We used this technique to review published reports of functional brain imaging studies of episodic memory in schizophrenia; our aim was to identify the brain regions that are consistently affected during the performance of episodic memory tasks.

METHOD

Literature search and criteria for inclusion

A literature search was performed to retrieve studies that compared the brain activation elicited by an episodic memory task between a group of people with schizophrenia and a control group of healthy people. Our inclusion criteria were:

  1. (a) participation of a group of people with an established diagnosis of schizophrenia (or schizophrenia-spectrum disorders) and a healthy control group;

  2. (b) administration of a target episodic memory task (encoding or retrieval) and a reference (baseline) task concomitant to the acquisition of functional neuroimaging data;

  3. (c) direct statistical comparison between the pattern of activation elicited by this memory task (relative to the reference task) in the schizophrenia group v. the control group;

  4. (d) reporting of the focus of the peaks of differential activation between the two groups according to the Talairach/Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI) coordinate system (Reference Talairach and TournouxTalairach & Tournoux, 1988; Reference Evans, Collins and MillsEvans et al, 1993).

Data extraction and processing

Eighteen studies published between January 1996 and October 2004 met the criteria for inclusion in our meta-analysis (Table 1). Other studies meeting our inclusion criteria except for the absence of Talairach/MNI coordinates (Reference Ragland, Gur and GlahnRagland et al, 1998; Reference Shihabuddin, Buchsbaum and HazlettShihabuddin et al, 1998; Hazlett et al, Reference Hazlett, Buchsbaum and Byne1999, Reference Hazlett, Buchsbaum and Jeu2000; Reference Nohara, Suzuki and KurachiNohara et al, 2000) were reviewed but were not included in the meta-analysis. Altogether, 228 foci reported in these studies corresponded to a between-group difference in brain activation during the performance of a memory task. Studies often used different methods of analysis and different thresholds and so we included all foci reported to be significant using the criteria designated in the individual studies. Following a technique similar to that used by other groups (Reference Chein, Fissell and JacobsChein et al, 2002; Reference Turkeltaub, Eden and JonesTurkeltaub et al, 2002; Wager et al, Reference Wager, Phan and Liberzon2003, Reference Wager, Jonides and Reading2004), we created a three-dimensional file with a value of 1 at each of these 228 foci and smoothed it to model each focus as a Gaussian sphere with a full width at half-maximum of 14 mm. After smoothing, the overlap of neighbouring Gaussian spheres led to greater values, termed activation likelihood estimate (ALE) values by Turkeltaub et al (Reference Turkeltaub, Eden and Jones2002), in certain brain regions where multiple foci agglomerated.

Table 1 Studies included in the meta-analysis

Reference Sample size Probability threshold Extent threshold ROI Imaging threshold Target task Reference task
Sz n Co n
Encoding > low-level baseline Encoding Baseline
Eyler Zorrilla et al (Reference Eyler Zorrilla, Jeste and Paulus2002) 9 10 0.025 7 voxels Hippocampus, parahippocampal gyrus, inferior frontal gyrus and fusiform gyrus fMRI Novel picture encoding Presentation of a repeated picture
Hofer et al (Reference Hofer, Weiss and Golaszewski2003a ) 10 10 0.001 No No fMRI Like/dislike judgements for words Rest
Hofer et al (Reference Hofer, Weiss and Golaszewski2003b ) 10 10 0.05 corrected No No fMRI Like/dislike judgements for words Rest
Jessen et al (Reference Jessen, Scheef and Germeshausen2003) 12 12 0.05 10 voxels Hippocampus fMRI Internally associate another noun to the presented word Presentation of XOXO and OXOX in alternation
Kubicki et al (Reference Kubicki, McCarley and Nestor2003) 9 9 0.001 0.05 corrected No fMRI Deep encoding (abstract/concrete judgements for words) Rest
Leube et al (Reference Leube, Rapp and Buchkremer2003) 0.05 corrected 0.05 corrected No fMRI Encoding unfamiliar faces Fixation cross
Ragland et al (Reference Ragland, Gur and Raz2001) 23 23 0.005 50 voxels No PET Encoding words presented twice Motor baseline task
Ragland et al (Reference Ragland, Gur and Valdez2004) 14 15 0.005 8 voxels Regions activated in either group fMRI Encoding words presented twice Average prestimulus baseline response
Retrieval > non-episodic retrieval Retrieval Non-episodic retrieval
Andreasen et al (Reference Andreasen, O'Leary and Cizadlo1996) 14 13 0.005 No No PET Recall of story learned once Rest
Andreasen et al (Reference Andreasen, O'Leary and Cizadlo1996) 14 13 0.005 No No PET Recall of well-learned story Rest
Crespo-Facorro et al (Reference Crespo-Facorro, Paradiso and Andreasen1999) 14 13 0.005 50 voxels No PET Recall of words learned to 100% recall Rest
Crespo-Facorro et al (Reference Crespo-Facorro, Paradiso and Andreasen1999) 14 13 0.005 50 voxels No PET Recall of words learned once Rest
Ganguli et al (Reference Ganguli, Carter and Mintun1997) 8 8 0.05? In 2 slices Regions activated in either group PET Recall of words Fixation cross
Heckers et al (Reference Heckers, Rauch and Goff1998) 13 8 0.001 No No fMRI Stem-recall for words encoded once Stem completion (from semantic memory)
Hofer et al (Reference Hofer, Weiss and Golaszewski2003a ) 10 10 0.001 No No fMRI Forced-choice word recognition Rest
Hofer et al (Reference Hofer, Weiss and Golaszewski2003b ) 10 10 0.05 corrected No No fMRI Forced-choice word recognition Rest
Jessen et al (Reference Jessen, Scheef and Germeshausen2003) 12 12 0.05 10 voxels Hippocampus fMRI Recognition of unstudied words Null event (interstimulus interval)
Jessen et al (Reference Jessen, Scheef and Germeshausen2003) 12 12 0.05 10 voxels Hippocampus fMRI Recognition of studied words Null event (interstimulus interval)
Ragland et al (Reference Ragland, Gur and Raz2001) 23 23 0.005 50 voxels No PET Recognition of studied and unstudied words Motor baseline task
Ragland et al (Reference Ragland, Gur and Valdez2004) 14 15 0.005 8 voxels Regions activated in either group fMRI Recognition of studied and unstudied words Average prestimulus baseline response
Weiss et al (Reference Weiss, Schacter and Goff2003) 12 12 0.001 in hippocampus and prefrontal cortex, 0.05 corrected in other brain areas No Different thresholds PET Stem-recall for words encoded four times Stem-completion (from semantic memory)
Weiss et al (Reference Weiss, Schacter and Goff2003) 12 12 0.001 in hippocampus and prefrontal cortex, 0.05 corrected in other brain areas No Different thresholds PET Stem-recall for words encoded semantically Stem-completion (from semantic memory)
Wiser et al (Reference Wiser, Andreasen and O'Leary1998) 15 29 0.005 No No PET Recognition of words studied to 100% performance and of unstudied words Reading words
Retrieval: high > low High retrieval Low retrieval
Crespo-Facorro et al (Reference Crespo-Facorro, Wiser and Andreasen2001) 19 34 0.005 50 voxels No PET Recognition of well-learned words1 Recognition of words learned once1
Heckers et al (Reference Heckers, Rauch and Goff1998) 13 8 0.001 No No PET Stem-recall for words encoded four times Stem-recall for words encoded once
Heckers et al (Reference Heckers, Curran and Goff2000) 9 8 0.001 No No PET Recognition of studied images Recognition of unstudied images
Ragland et al (Reference Ragland, Gur and Valdez2004) 13 15 0.005 8 voxels Regions activated in either group fMRI Word recognition hits Word recognition correct rejections
Weiss et al (Reference Weiss, Schacter and Goff2003) 12 12 0.001 in hippocampus and prefrontal cortex, 0.05 corrected in other brain areas No Different thresholds PET Stem-recall for words encoded semantically Stem-recall for words encoded perceptually
Weiss et al (Reference Weiss, Zalesak and DeWitt2004) 15 16 0.01 5 voxels Hippocampus fMRI Recognition of mainly studied words1 Recognition of mainly unstudied words1
Other studies
Kubicki et al (Reference Kubicki, McCarley and Nestor2003) 9 9 0.001 0.05 corrected No fMRI Deep encoding (abstract/concrete judgements for words) Shallow encoding (lower/upper-case judgements)
Barch et al (Reference Barch, Csernansky and Conturo2002) 38 48 0.0025 9 voxels No fMRI Conjunction of encoding > fixation and recognition > fixation for both verbal and figural stimuli

Table 2 Thresholds associated with each category of contrasts to which the meta-analysis procedure was applied

Category Studies n Foci n Voxel threshold1 Simulation threshold1
Overall 18 229 0.005140 0.006206
Encoding > baseline
   Controls > schizophrenia 8 29 0.002380 0.003116
   Schizophrenia > controls 2 9 0.002030 0.002417
Retrieval > baseline
   Controls > schizophrenia 10 115 0.003920 0.004844
   Schizophrenia > controls 5 20 0.002280 0.002509
Retrieval: high > low
   Controls > schizophrenia 5 17 0.002160 0.002463
   Schizophrenia > controls 6 30 0.002410 0.002981

Statistical significance of these ALE values was then determined using 1000 simulated sets of 228 randomly distributed foci throughout the brain. Based on these simulations, two methods were used to determine a significance threshold. First, following the method described by Turkeltaub et al (Reference Turkeltaub, Eden and Jones2002), we used as a threshold the ALE value that was observed with a voxel probability of 0.001 (i.e. obtained by chance only once in every 1000 voxels in the simulations). Second, we also extracted the value corresponding to 0.05 simulations (i.e. obtained by chance in at least 1 voxel in only 5% of the simulations). This threshold was found to be more restrictive than the voxel threshold and the regions that met this threshold are highlighted in bold characters in Tables 3 and 4.

Table 3 Overall regions of significant agglomeration of foci of differential activation between participants with schizophrenia and controls during the performance of memory tasks. The foci reported in bold also met the simulation threshold

x 1 y 1 z 1 Region BA ALE value2 Associated voxel probability
–4 54 4 Left medial frontal 10 0.005534 0.000510
–40 32 8 Left inferior frontal 45 0.008400 0.000002
–6 30 36 Anterior cingulate 32 0.005962 0.000237
–38 4 34 Left precentral/middle frontal gyrus 9 0.005600 0.000452
–32 –12 –20 Left anterior hippocampus 0.007379 0.000016
–50 –42 0 Left middle/superior temporal gyrus 22 0.005830 0.000300
–38 –44 –22 Left fusiform gyrus 37 0.005237 0.000844
–22 –62 –42 Left cerebellum 0.006390 0.000108
16 44 20 Right medial frontal 9 0.005336 0.000711
28 –10 –8 Right anterior medial temporal lobe 0.006885 0.000042
22 –32 2 Right posterior hippocampus 0.006390 0.000108
24 –72 –10 Right fusiform gyrus 19 0.005699 0.000378

Table 4 Regions of significant agglomeration of foci of differential activation between participants with schizophrenia and controls for three categories of contrasts. The foci reported in bold also met the simulation threshold

x y z Region BA ALE value Associated voxel probability
Encoding > baseline
   Controls > schizophrenia
   –42 30 6 Left inferior frontal gyrus 45 0.00285 0.000319
   24 54 2 Right anterior middle frontal gyrus 10 0.003886 0.000025
   20 44 20 Right medial frontal gyrus 9 0.003139 0.000172
   20 –34 2 Right posterior hippocampus 0.003231 0.000141
   Schizophrenia > controls No significant clusters of activation
Retrieval > baseline
   Controls > schizophrenia
   –4 54 4 Left medial frontal gyrus 10 0.005294 0.000059
   –38 36 36 Left middle frontal gyrus 9 0.004315 0.000437
   –42 26 16 Left inferior frontal gyrus 45 0.006221 0.000008
   –40 2 26 Left precentral gyrus 6 0.004024 0.000804
   –4 –12 14 Left thalamus 0.004315 0.000437
   –30 –14 –20 Left hippocampus 0.005559 0.000034
   –22 –62 –42 Left cerebellum 0.00675 0.000003
   –2 –80 –14 Cerebellum/lingual gyrus 18 0.004632 0.000229
   4 26 –8 Subgenual 32 0.004791 0.000166
   8 –24 10 Right thalamus 0.004738 0.000183
   26 –74 –8 Right fusiform gyrus 18 0.0054 0.000047
   Schizophrenia > controls
   28 –8 –10 Right anterior medial temporal lobe 0.004105 0.000004
Retrieval: high > low
   Controls > schizophrenia
   24 –28 0 Right posterior hippocampus 0.003679 0.000014
   Schizophrenia > controls
   –8 30 36 Anterior cingulate 32 0.004212 0.000011
   38 –16 –34 Right parahippocampal gyrus 20 0.002659 0.000508
   44 –54 52 Right superior parietal lobule 40 0.002510 0.000718

After applying this procedure for all 228 foci regardless of the tasks, we grouped the individual contrasts into independent categories:

  1. (a) memory encoding v. low-level baseline (8 studies);

  2. (b) memory retrieval v. non-episodic retrieval comparison tasks (11 studies);

  3. (c) high v. low retrieval conditions (6 studies).

Only two studies used contrasts that did not fit into any of these categories (see Table 1).

For the studies using high v. low levels of retrieval conditions, some between-group contrasts were performed using the within-group contrast in one direction (high retrieval > low retrieval), whereas others were in the other direction (low retrieval > high retrieval). To combine the different studies while taking the direction of the group difference into account, within-group contrasts that were in the low > high retrieval direction (Reference Crespo-Facorro, Wiser and AndreasenCrespo-Facorro et al, 2001; Reference Weiss, Zalesak and DeWittWeiss et al, 2004) were reversed by also reversing the group comparison. (Between-group functional neuroimaging analyses are in fact group by task interactions, i.e. a contrast of contrasts. Within-subject contrasts have to be performed first and the output of these contrasts are then used for the between-group comparisons: it is a difference of differences. For two groups (A and B) and two tasks (1 and 2), we can say that mathematically (A1-A2)-(B1-B2)=(B2-B1)-(A2-A1) and (A2-A1)-(B2-B1)= (B1-B2)-(A1-A2). It is thus possible to reverse a within-subject contrast by also reversing the group contrast.) Three-dimensional maps of smoothed foci were then created and thresholded for each of the three categories and each between-group contrast direction (Table 2) with the same valid method that could also be used for combining within-group contrasts.

RESULTS

Overall meta-analysis

When all foci were included in the meta-analysis, the areas of significant agglomeration were located in the left inferior prefrontal cortex, bilateral medial frontal cortex, anterior cingulate, left precentral/middle frontal gyrus, bilateral anterior medial temporal lobe, right posterior hippocampus, left superior temporal gyrus, bilateral fusiform gyrus and left cerebellum (Table 3, Fig. 1).

Fig. 1 Regions of significant agglomeration of foci in the overall meta-analysis. The y values given for the coronal slices denote the coordinates in the Talairach/MNI system; the colour range represents the above threshold voxel probability.

Specific contrasts

The clustering into three categories allowed us to identify the regions that were either more or less active in the schizophrenia group relative to the control group.

For the encoding v. low-level baseline category (Table 4, Fig. 2a), the control group exhibited greater activation across studies in the left inferior prefrontal cortex, right anterior middle frontal gyrus, right medial frontal gyrus and right posterior hippocampus relative to people with schizophrenia. No region showed significant agglomeration for the schizophrenia group relative to controls.

Fig. 2 Regions of significant agglomeration of foci in category of contrasts: (a) encoding v. low-level baseline; (b) retrieval v. non-episodic retrieval baseline; (c) high v. low retrieval. The y and x values denote the coordinates in the Talairach/MNI system for the coronal slices and sagittal slices, respectively; the colour ranges represent the above-threshold voxel probability.

For the retrieval v. non-episodic retrieval comparison tasks category (Table 4, Fig. 2b), control participants had clusters of greater activation in the left inferior prefrontal cortex, left middle frontal gyrus, left medial frontal gyrus, right subgenual region, left precentral gyrus, bilateral thalamus, left anterior hippocampus, right fusiform gyrus and bilateral cerebellum. The only region to show significant agglomeration for people with schizophrenia relative to controls was the right anterior medial temporal temporal lobe (border between hippocampus and amygdala).

For the high retrieval v. low retrieval category (Table 4, Fig. 2c), a cluster of greater activation for the control participants was observed in the right posterior hippocampus. For participants with schizophrenia, clusters were observed in the cingulate gyrus, right parahippocampal gyrus and right superior parietal cortex.

DISCUSSION

Using a new meta-analytic approach, we performed a quantitative review of functional neuroimaging studies of episodic memory in schizophrenia. This meta-analysis revealed a set of brain regions showing consistent patterns of differential activation between people with schizophrenia and healthy individuals during the performance of diverse memory tasks. Consistent with previous models of brain dysfunctions in schizophrenia and qualitative reviews on this same topic (Reference Weiss and HeckersWeiss & Heckers, 2001), the regions that showed the most consistent differences between people with schizophrenia and healthy participants were located in the prefrontal cortex and in the temporal lobe. Hypotheses relating to the potential causes of this differential frontal and temporal activity in schizophrenia are discussed below. Foci of consistent differential activation between groups were also observed in the thalamus and cerebellum and provide support for abnormalities in the cortical-thalamic-cerebellar-cortical circuit in schizophrenia.

Left inferior prefrontal cortex

The left inferior prefrontal cortex was the main region that distinguished between control and schizophrenia groups in this meta-analysis. This region showed the most significant agglomeration of foci in the overall meta-analysis, and was found to be consistently more active in controls relative to people with schizophrenia during both encoding and retrieval relative to baseline conditions. The region is involved in elaborative semantic or phonological processing and in the implementation of strategies (e.g. organisation) during episodic memory encoding (Reference Dempster and BrainerdDempster & Brainerd, 1995; Reference Simons and SpiersSimons & Spiers, 2003); it is also active during strategic search, the maintenance of successfully retrieved information and response selection during retrieval (Reference Badre and WagnerBadre & Wagner, 2002; Reference PetridesPetrides, 2002; Reference Petrides, Alivisatos and FreyPetrides et al, 2002; Reference Simons and SpiersSimons & Spiers, 2003). Interestingly, it has been postulated that during encoding, people with schizophrenia fail to engage spontaneously in efficient elaborative processing. Ragland et al (Reference Ragland, Gur and Raz2001) have suggested that people with schizophrenia process stimuli on a more superficial level and do not spontaneously use semantic processing to guide memory encoding and retrieval. None the less, it seems that people with schizophrenia can use specific cues or strategies to improve their performance when they are provided with them (Reference Kubicki, McCarley and NestorKubicki et al, 2003; Reference Ragland, Moelter and McGrathRagland et al, 2003). For example, Ragland et al (Reference Ragland, Moelter and McGrath2003) used a level of processing paradigm (Reference Craik and LockhartCraik & Lockhart, 1972) to study verbal recognition memory in schizophrenia. During encoding, participants were instructed to make either ‘upper case’ v. ‘lower case’ judgements (shallow encoding) or ‘concrete’ v. ‘abstract’ judgements (deep encoding). On a subsequent recognition memory test there was no significant difference in performance between control participants and those with schizophrenia, and both groups benefited from deeper encoding. Similarly, Paul et al (Reference Paul, Elvevåg and Bokat2005) observed a modulation of recognition memory performance by the level of processing in schizophrenia, although in their study patients performed more poorly on the recognition tasks relative to the control group. It follows that it is not primarily the capacity to use elaborative processing to improve memory performance that is affected in schizophrenia, but rather the tendency to use a deep elaborative encoding strategy when no specific instructions are provided.

In healthy participants a relationship between left inferior prefrontal cortex activity and the use of deeper processing during encoding has been extensively reported (e.g. Reference Kapur, Craik and TulvingKapur et al, 1994; Reference Kubicki, McCarley and NestorKubicki et al, 2003; Reference Petersson, Sandblom and ElfgrenPetersson et al, 2003). This same relationship was examined in people with schizophrenia by Kubicki et al (Reference Kubicki, McCarley and Nestor2003), who contrasted the neural correlates of elaborative semantic processing with those related to perceptual processing. Relative to controls, people with schizophrenia showed reduced activation of the left inferior prefrontal cortex for the contrast between semantic and perceptual encoding, despite their normal performance and despite the normal modulation of memory performance by level of processing (Reference Craik and LockhartCraik & Lockhart, 1972). This difference in activation may stem from a between-group difference in stimulus processing, reflecting either relatively reduced processing during semantic encoding or relatively increased processing during perceptual encoding, even if this difference does not affect subsequent recognition performance.

It has been suggested that some of the cognitive impairments in schizophrenia might be secondary to patients’ impaired ability to use organisational strategies to maximise performance (Reference BaumanBauman, 1971; Reference Koh, Kayton and PetersonKoh et al, 1976; Reference Iddon, McKenna and SahakianIddon et al, 1998; Reference Hazlett, Buchsbaum and JeuHazlett et al, 2000). For instance, people with schizophrenia do not spontaneously use semantic clustering as a strategy to improve their memory performance (Reference Gold, Randolph and CarpenterGold et al, 1992; Reference Paulsen, Heaton and SadekPaulsen et al, 1995; Brebion et al, Reference Brebion, Amador and Smith1997, Reference Brebion, David and Jones2004; Reference Hazlett, Buchsbaum and JeuHazlett et al, 2000; Reference Nohara, Suzuki and KurachiNohara et al, 2000). Organisational strategies are thought to rely at least in part on the left inferior prefrontal cortex during both encoding and retrieval (Reference Fletcher, Shallice and DolanFletcher et al, 1998; Reference Wagner, Koutstaal and SchacterWagner et al, 1999; Reference Simons and SpiersSimons & Spiers, 2003). With regards to retrieval, Nohara et al (Reference Nohara, Suzuki and Kurachi2000) have observed a significant correlation between categorical clustering and the activation in this cortical region in control participants that was not observed in people with schizophrenia. Taken together, these results suggest that the differential activation of this region in people with schizophrenia could be related to their inability to use efficient strategies spontaneously during both encoding and retrieval.

Another possibility is that the decreased activation of the left inferior prefrontal cortex is related to memory performance because this region has also been thought to be involved in retrieval success (Reference Habib, Lepage and TulvingHabib & Lepage, 2000; Reference Konishi, Wheeler and DonaldsonKonishi et al, 2000). The region was, however, observed to be deactivated in schizophrenia even when there was no significant difference in performance between groups (Reference Andreasen, O'Leary and CizadloAndreasen et al, 1996; Reference Wiser, Andreasen and O'LearyWiser et al, 1998; Reference Ragland, Gur and RazRagland et al, 2001; Reference Hofer, Weiss and GolaszewskiHofer et al, 2003a ; Reference Kubicki, McCarley and NestorKubicki et al, 2003). Even if it has been shown that people with schizophrenia are less likely to base their recognition judgements on conscious recollection relative to control participants (Reference Huron, Danion and GiacomoniHuron et al, 1995; Reference Danion, Rizzo and BruantDanion et al, 1999), it is unlikely that the deactivation of this cortical region observed in this group relates to the reduced proportion of successfully or consciously recollected items, because there was no significant clustering of differential activation between groups in that region for the contrast between high and low retrieval conditions.

Medial temporal lobes

Functional neuroimaging studies in healthy individuals have consistently implicated the medial temporal lobes in both memory encoding and memory retrieval (Reference Lepage, Habib and TulvingLepage et al, 1998; Reference Schacter and WagnerSchacter & Wagner, 1999). During encoding, the hippocampal formation is thought to support the encoding of information in a meaningful way, such as creating new associations (Reference Vandenberghe, Price and WiseVandenberghe et al, 1996; Henke et al, Reference Henke, Buck and Weber1997, Reference Henke, Weber and Kneifel1999; Reference Lepage, Habib and CormierLepage et al, 2000; Reference Davachi, Maril and WagnerDavachi et al, 2001; Reference Davachi and WagnerDavachi & Wagner, 2002; Reference Achim and LepageAchim & Lepage, 2005b ). Medial temporal activation during encoding has also been shown to predict subsequent recognition success (Reference Brewer, Zhao and DesmondBrewer et al, 1998; Reference Wagner, Schacter and RotteWagner et al, 1998; Reference Davachi, Mitchell and WagnerDavachi et al, 2003; Reference Chua, Rand-Giovannetti and SchacterChua et al, 2004; Reference Jackson and SchacterJackson & Schacter, 2004), supporting the implication of this structure in the creation of durable memory traces. Our meta-analysis revealed a significant agglomeration of foci of reduced activation in people with schizophrenia in the right hippocampus during encoding, possibly reflecting the less efficient or less associative encoding strategies used by people with schizophrenia.

Different lines of evidence suggest that during memory retrieval the hippocampus supports conscious recollection of information from memory, whereas the parahippocampal gyrus is involved in familiarity assessment (Reference YonelinasYonelinas, 2002). It has also been suggested that people with schizophrenia could have a specific deficit in conscious recollection (Reference Huron, Danion and GiacomoniHuron et al, 1995; Reference Danion, Rizzo and BruantDanion et al, 1999; Reference Weiss, Schacter and GoffWeiss et al, 2003). The results from our meta-analysis support this idea by showing that people with schizophrenia present a deactivation of the region implicated in conscious recollection (i.e. the hippocampus) when exposed to conditions favouring the recovery of information from memory (high v. low retrieval). Moreover, this hippocampal deactivation is accompanied by an overactivation of the region implicated in familiarity assessment (i.e. the parahippocampal gyrus), suggesting that people with schizophrenia use familiarity assessment rather than conscious recollection as a basis for retrieval.

Another interesting observation is a focus of agglomeration of greater activation in schizophrenia relative to controls during memory retrieval v. baseline, centred in the right anterior medial temporal lobe. In contrast, control participants show greater left lateralised activation in this region for the same comparison. This pattern of activation is consistent with the idea that people with schizophrenia show less lateralised medial temporal activation as a function of stimulus type (verbal and non-verbal) (Reference Crow, Ball and BloomCrow et al, 1989; Reference Gur, Jaggi and ShtaselGur et al, 1994), because all studies included in the retrieval v. baseline category used verbal stimuli.

Other frontal regions

A few other prefrontal regions showed significant agglomeration of foci in our meta-analysis. For instance, the left middle frontal gyrus showed significant agglomeration of foci in the controls relative to people with schizophrenia for the retrieval v. baseline contrast. This region is known to support post-retrieval monitoring during episodic memory retrieval, with activation typically in the right middle frontal gyrus for more simple monitoring and additional involvement of the left middle frontal gyrus for more complex tasks (Reference Achim and LepageAchim & Lepage, 2005a ). The observation that the left middle frontal gyrus shows a greater activation in controls suggests a specific impairment of more complex post-retrieval monitoring processes in schizophrenia, a view consistent with the finding that more complex tasks reveal greater memory impairment (Reference Danion, Rizzo and BruantDanion et al, 1999).

The anterior medial prefrontal cortex also showed significant agglomeration in the general meta-analysis as well as in encoding v. baseline and retrieval v. baseline. This region is thought to be involved in the retrieval of self-relevant or self-generatedgenerated self-information (Reference Simons and SpiersSimons & Spiers, 2003; Reference Fossati, Hevenor and LepageFossati et al, 2004), although the specific mechanisms remain to be understood. Failure to activate these regions in people with schizophrenia could reflect their difficulty in using sources of information other than the ones provided by the task.

The anterior cingulate also showed significant agglomeration in both the overall meta-analysis and the high v. low retrieval category. Paus et al (Reference Paus, Koski and Caramanos1998) have suggested that the anterior cingulate has a role in memory and cognitive effort. It could be the case that this activity reflects the greater effort needed by people with schizophrenia to perform these memory tasks.

Other regions: cerebellum, thalamus

The cerebellum projects to motor and prefrontal regions of the cerebral cortex through synapses in the thalamus. Through this circuit, the cerebellum is thought to modulate and coordinate both motor and cognitive functions (Andreasen et al, Reference Andreasen, O'Leary and Cizadlo1996, Reference Andreasen, Paradiso and O'Leary1998, Reference Andreasen, Nopoulos and O'Leary1999). Converging evidence has pointed to dysfunctions of this cortical-cerebellar-thalamic-cortical circuit in schizophrenia, and our findings of significant agglomerations of foci observed in the cerebellum and thalamus are consistent with this notion. The specific neural mechanisms underlying the coordination of cognitive activity by the cerebellum, however, remain to be clarified. It has been proposed that the cerebellum could modulate memory processing through a mechanism for correction of discrepancies (Reference SchmahmannSchmahmann, 1991; Reference Fink, Markowitsch and ReinkemeierFink et al, 1996; Reference Greve, Stanford and SuttonGreve et al, 1999) or through a mechanism for coordination between different pieces of information (Reference FabbroFabbro, 2000).

Studies without Talairach/MNI coordinates

Five functional neuroimaging studies of memory in schizophrenia could not be included in the meta-analysis because no Talairach/MNI coordinates were reported (Reference Ragland, Gur and GlahnRagland et al, 1998; Reference Shihabuddin, Buchsbaum and HazlettShihabuddin et al, 1998; Hazlett et al, Reference Hazlett, Buchsbaum and Byne1999, Reference Hazlett, Buchsbaum and Jeu2000; Reference Nohara, Suzuki and KurachiNohara et al, 2000). Two of these studies used restricted regions of interest either in the thalamus (Reference Hazlett, Buchsbaum and ByneHazlett et al, 1999) or in the striatum (Reference Shihabuddin, Buchsbaum and HazlettShihabuddin et al, 1998) and observed decreased activation in these regions in schizophrenia relative to controls. The other three studies examined the entire brain and, consistent with our results, reported reduced activation in participants with schizophrenia in the left inferior frontal gyrus and other frontal regions (Reference Ragland, Gur and GlahnRagland et al, 1998; Reference Hazlett, Buchsbaum and JeuHazlett et al, 2000; Reference Nohara, Suzuki and KurachiNohara et al, 2000) as well as in the temporal lobe (Reference Ragland, Gur and GlahnRagland et al, 1998; Reference Hazlett, Buchsbaum and JeuHazlett et al, 2000) during episodic memory tasks. Overall these results are consistent with those that reported Talairach/MNI coordinates for peaks of activation, making it unlikely that the exclusion of these five studies from our meta-analysis biased our results.

Future research

In summary, the quantitative aspect of this meta-analytic method represents an improvement over current qualitative methods because it offers an objective way of regrouping studies and summarising results. However, it must be noted that most of the studies reviewed here compared a memory task (encoding or retrieval) with a low-level baseline. Such contrasts are not ideal for discriminating the neural correlates of specific memory processes and instead are likely to reflect several cognitive and perceptual processes (Reference Stark and SquireStark & Squire, 2001). More sophisticated experimental designs would increase our chances of identifying selective deficient processes in schizophrenia and ultimately the neural correlates of these abnormal processes.

Clinical Implications and Limitations

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

  1. People with schizophrenia have abnormal patterns of brain activation during both memory encoding and retrieval.

  2. Several brain regions, including the prefrontal cortex and hippocampus, are implicated in these abnormal memory functions.

  3. One challenge to the cognitive remediation of memory problems in schizophrenia will be to take into consideration these multiple faulty memory processes and possibly executive dysfunctions when devising an intervention.

LIMITATIONS

  1. It was not possible to integrate the results from studies that did not report specific coordinates for their activation foci.

  2. The results obtained using this meta-analytic approach might have been biased by the inclusion of studies that used regions of interest (e.g. the hippocampus).

  3. The number of studies in each category was insufficient to assess the effect of important variables such as medication status or age on the pattern of agglomeration of activation foci.

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR; grant 53280), Fonds de Recherche en Santé du Québec and the National Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and Depression, and by a CIHR studentship to A.M.A. We thank Jorge Armony and André Achim for technical support and Matt Menear for editing the manuscript.

Footnotes

Declaration of interest

None. Funding detailed in Acknowledgements.

References

Achim, A. M. & Lepage, M. (2005a) Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex involvement in memory post-retrieval monitoring revealed in both item and associative recognition tests. Neuroimage, 24, 11131121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Achim, A. M. & Lepage, M. (2005b) Neural correlates of memory for items and for associations: an event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 652667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andreasen, N. C., O'Leary, D. S., Cizadlo, T., et al (1996) Schizophrenia and cognitive dysmetria: a positron-emission tomography study of dysfunctional prefrontal-thalamic-cerebellar circuitry. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 93, 99859990.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Andreasen, N. C., Paradiso, S. & O'Leary, D. S. (1998) ‘Cognitive dysmetria'as an integrative theory of schizophrenia: a dysfunction in cortical-subcortical-cerebellar circuitry? Schizophrenia Bulletin, 24, 203218.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Andreasen, N. C., Nopoulos, P., O'Leary, D. S., et al (1999) Defining the phenotype of schizophrenia: cognitive dysmetria and its neural mechanisms. Biological Psychiatry, 46, 908920.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Badre, D. & Wagner, A. D. (2002) Semantic retrieval, mnemonic control, and prefrontal cortex. Behavioural and Cognitive Neuroscience Reviews, 1, 206218.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barch, D. M., Csernansky, J. G., Conturo, T., et al (2002) Working and long-term memory deficits in schizophrenia: is there a common prefrontal mechanism? Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 111, 478494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauman, E. (1971) Schizophrenic short-term memory: a deficit in subjective organization. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 3, 5565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brebion, G., Amador, X., Smith, M. J., et al (1997) Mechanisms underlying memory impairment in schizophrenia. Psychological Medicine, 27, 383393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brebion, G., David, A. S., Jones, H., et al (2004) Semantic organization and verbal memory efficiency in patients with schizophrenia. Neuropsychology, 18, 378383.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brewer, J. B., Zhao, Z., Desmond, J. E., et al (1998) Making memories: brain activity that predicts how well visual experience will be remembered. Science, 281, 11851187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chein, J. M., Fissell, K., Jacobs, S., et al (2002) Functional heterogeneity within Broca's area during verbal working memory. Physiology and Behavior, 77, 635639.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chua, E. F., Rand-Giovannetti, E., Schacter, D. L., et al (2004) Dissociating confidence and accuracy: functional magnetic resonance imaging shows origins of the subjective memory experience. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16, 11311142.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Craik, F. I. M. & Lockhart, R. S. (1972) Levels of processing: a framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crespo-Facorro, B., Paradiso, S., Andreasen, N. C., et al (1999) Recalling word lists reveals ‘cognitive dysmetria’ in schizophrenia: a positron emission tomography study. American Journal of Psychiatry, 156, 386392.Google Scholar
Crespo-Facorro, B., Wiser, A., Andreasen, N., et al (2001) Neural basis of novel and well-learned recognition memory in schizophrenia: a positron emission tomography study. Human Brain Mapping, 12, 219231.3.0.CO;2-L>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crow, T. J., Ball, J., Bloom, S. R., et al (1989) Schizophrenia as an anomaly of development of cerebral asymmetry. A postmortem study and a proposal concerning the genetic basis of the disease. Archives of General Psychiatry, 46, 11451150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danion, J., Rizzo, L. & Bruant, A. (1999) Functional mechanisms underlying impaired recognition memory and conscious awareness in patients with schizophrenia. Archives of General Psychiatry, 56, 639644.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davachi, L. & Wagner, A. D. (2002) Hippocampal contributions to episodic encoding: insights from relational and item-based learning. Journal of Neurophysiology, 88, 982990.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davachi, L., Maril, A. & Wagner, A. (2001) When keeping in mind supports later bringing to mind: neural markers of phonological rehearsal predict subsequent remembering. Journal of Cognitive Neurosciences, 13, 10591070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davachi, L., Mitchell, J. P. & Wagner, A. D. (2003) Multiple routes to memory: distinct medial temporal lobe processes build item and source memories. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 100, 21572162.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dempster, F. N. & Brainerd, C. J. (eds) (1995) Interference and Inhibition in Cognition. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, A., Collins, D., Mills, S., et al (1993) 3D statistical neuroanatomical models from 305 MRI volumes. Proceedings of the IEEE-Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference, pp. 18131817. San Francisco, CA: IEEE.Google Scholar
Eyler Zorrilla, L. T., Jeste, D. V., Paulus, M., et al (2002) Functional abnormalities of medial temporal cortex during novel picture learning among patients with chronic schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Research, 59, 187198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fabbro, F. (2000) Introduction to language and the cerebellum. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 13, 8394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fink, G. R., Markowitsch, H. J., Reinkemeier, M., et al (1996) Cerebral representation of one's own past: neural networks involved in autobiographical memory. Journal of Neuroscience, 16, 42754282.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fletcher, P. C., Shallice, T. & Dolan, R. J. (1998) The functional roles of prefrontal cortex in episodic memory I. Encoding. Brain, 121, 12391248.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fossati, P., Hevenor, S. J., Lepage, M., et al (2004) Distributed self in episodic memory: neural correlates of successful retrieval of self-encoded positive and negative personality traits. Neuroimage, 22, 15961604.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fox, P. T., Parsons, L. M. & Lancaster, J. L. (1998) Beyond the single study: function/location metanalysis in cognitive neuroimaging. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 8, 178187.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ganguli, R., Carter, C., Mintun, M., et al (1997) PET brain mapping study of auditory verbal supraspan memory versus visual fixation in schizophrenia. Biological Psychiatry, 41, 3342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gold, J., Randolph, C., Carpenter, C., et al (1992) Forms of memory failure in schizophrenia. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 101, 487494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greve, K. W., Stanford, M. S., Sutton, C., et al (1999) Cognitive and emotional sequelae of cerebellar infarct: a case report. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 14, 455469.Google ScholarPubMed
Gur, R., Jaggi, J., Shtasel, D., et al (1994) Cerebral blood flow in schizophrenia: effects of memory processing on regional activation. Biological Psychiatry, 35, 315.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Habib, R. & Lepage, M. (2000) Novelty assessment in the brain. In Memory, Consciousness, and the Brain: The Tallinn Conference (ed. Tulving, E.), pp. 265277 Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Hazlett, E. A., Buchsbaum, M. S., Byne, W., et al (1999) Three-dimensional analysis with MRI and PET of the size, shape, and function of the thalamus in the schizophrenia spectrum. American Journal of Psychiatry, 156, 11901199.Google Scholar
Hazlett, E. A., Buchsbaum, M. S., Jeu, L. A., et al (2000) Hypofrontality in unmedicated schizophrenia patients studied with PET during performance of a serial verbal learning task. Schizophrenia Research, 43, 3346.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heckers, S., Rauch, S. L., Goff, D., et al (1998) Impaired recruitment of the hippocampus during conscious recollection in schizophrenia. Nature Neuroscience, 1, 318323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heckers, S., Curran, T., Goff, D., et al (2000) Abnormalities in the thalamus and prefrontal cortex during episodic object recognition in schizophrenia. Biological Psychiatry, 48, 651657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henke, K., Buck, A., Weber, B., et al (1997) Human hippocampus establishes associations in memory. Hippocampus, 7, 249256.3.0.CO;2-G>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Henke, K., Weber, B., Kneifel, S., et al (1999) Human hippocampus associates information in memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 96, 58845889.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hofer, A., Weiss, E. M., Golaszewski, S. M., et al (2003a) An FMRI study of episodic encoding and recognition of words in patients with schizophrenia in remission. American Journal of Psychiatry, 160, 911918.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofer, A., Weiss, E. M., Golaszewski, S. M., et al (2003b) Neural correlates of episodic encoding and recognition of words in unmedicated patients during an acute episode of schizophrenia: a functional MRI study. American Journal of Psychiatry, 160, 18021808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huron, C., Danion, J., Giacomoni, F., et al (1995) Impairment of recognition memory with, but not without, conscious recollection in schizophrenia. American Journal of Psychiatry, 152, 17371742.Google ScholarPubMed
Iddon, J. L., McKenna, P. J., Sahakian, B. J., et al (1998) Impaired generation and use of strategy in schizophrenia: evidence from visuospatial and verbal tasks. Psychological Medicine, 28, 10491062.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jackson, O. & Schacter, D. L. (2004) Encoding activity in anterior medial temporal lobe supports subsequent associative recognition. Neuroimage, 21, 456462.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jessen, F., Scheef, L., Germeshausen, L., et al (2003) Reduced hippocampal activation during encoding and recognition of words in schizophrenia patients. American Journal of Psychiatry, 160, 13051312.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kapur, S., Craik, F. I. M., Tulving, E., et al (1994) Neuroanatomical correlates of encoding in episodic memory: levels of processing effect. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 91, 20082011.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koh, S., Kayton, L. & Peterson, R. (1976) Affective encoding and consequent remembering in schizophrenic young adults. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 85, 156166.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Konishi, S., Wheeler, M. E., Donaldson, D. I., et al (2000) Neural correlates of episodic retrieval success. Neuroimage, 12, 276286.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kubicki, M., McCarley, R. W., Nestor, P. G., et al (2003) An fMRI study of semantic processing in men with schizophrenia. Neuroimage, 20, 19231933.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lepage, M., Habib, R. & Tulving, E. (1998) Hippocampal PET activations of memory encoding and retrieval: the HIPER model. Hippocampus, 8, 313322.3.0.CO;2-I>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lepage, M., Habib, R., Cormier, H., et al (2000) Neural correlates of semantic associative encoding in episodic memory. Cognitive Brain Research, 9, 271280.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leube, D. T., Rapp, A., Buchkremer, G., et al (2003) Hippocampal dysfunction during episodic memory encoding in patients with schizophrenia – an fMRI study. Schizophrenia Research, 64, 8385.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nohara, S., Suzuki, M., Kurachi, M., et al (2000) Neural correlates of memory organization deficits in schizophrenia. A single photon emission computed tomography study with 99mTc-ethyl-cysteinate dimer during a verbal learning task. Schizophrenia Research, 42, 209222.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paul, B., Elvevåg, B., Bokat, C., et al (2005) Level of processing effects on recognition memory in patients with schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Research, 74, 101110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paulsen, J., Heaton, R., Sadek, J., et al (1995) The nature of learning and memory impairments in schizophrenia. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 1, 8899.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paus, T., Koski, L., Caramanos, Z., et al (1998) Regional differences in the effects of task difficulty and motor output on blood flow response in the human anterior cingulate cortex: a review of 107 PET activation studies. Neuroreport, 9, R37R47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petersson, K. M., Sandblom, J., Elfgren, C., et al (2003) Instruction-specific brain activations during episodic encoding: a generalized level of processing effect. Neuroimaging, 20, 17951810.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petrides, M. (2002) The mid-ventrolateral prefrontal cortex and active mnemonic retrieval. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, 78, 528538.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petrides, M., Alivisatos, B. & Frey, S. (2002) Differential activation of the human orbital, mid-ventrolateral, and mid-dorsolateral prefrontal cortex during the processing of visual stimuli. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 99, 56495654.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ragland, J., Gur, R., Glahn, D., et al (1998) Frontotemporal cerebral blood flow change during executive and declarative memory tasks in schizophrenia: a positron emission tomography study. Neuropsychology, 12, 399413.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ragland, J. D., Gur, R. C., Raz, J., et al (2001) Effect of schizophrenia on frontotemporal activity during word encoding and recognition: a PET cerebral blood flow study. American Journal of Psychiatry, 158, 11141125.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ragland, J. D., Moelter, S. T., McGrath, C., et al (2003) Levels-of-processing effect on word recognition in schizophrenia. Biological Psychiatry, 54, 11541161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ragland, J. D., Gur, R. C., Valdez, J., et al (2004) Event-related fMRI of frontotemporal activity during word encoding and recognition in schizophrenia. American Journal of Psychiatry, 161, 10041015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schacter, D. L. & Wagner, A. D. (1999) Medial temporal lobe activations in fMRI and PET studies of episodic encoding and retrieval. Hippocampus, 9, 724.3.0.CO;2-K>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmahmann, J. D. (1991) An emerging concept. The cerebellar contribution to higher function. Archives of Neurology, 48, 11781187.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shihabuddin, L., Buchsbaum, M. S., Hazlett, E. A., et al (1998) Dorsal striatal size, shape, and metabolic rate in never-medicated and previously medicated schizophrenics performing a verbal learning task. Archives of General Psychiatry, 55, 235243.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simons, J. & Spiers, H. (2003) Prefrontal and medial temporal lobe interactions in long-term memory [in process citation]. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4, 637648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stark, C. E. & Squire, L. R. (2001) When zero is not zero: the problem of ambiguous baseline conditions in fMRI. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 98, 1276012766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Talairach, J. & Tournoux, P. (1988) Co-planar Stereotaxic Atlas of the Human Brain. New York: Thieme.Google Scholar
Turkeltaub, P. E., Eden, G. F., Jones, K. M., et al (2002) Meta-analysis of the functional neuroanatomy of single word reading: method and validation. Neuroimage, 16, 765780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vandenberghe, R., Price, C. J., Wise, R., et al (1996) Functional anatomy of a common semantic system for words and pictures. Nature, 383, 254256.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wager, T. D., Phan, K. L., Liberzon, I., et al (2003) Valence, gender, and lateralization of functional brain anatomy in emotion: a meta-analysis of findings from neuroimaging. Neuroimage, 19, 513531.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wager, T. D., Jonides, J. & Reading, S. (2004) Neuroimaging studies of shifting attention: a metaanalysis. Neuroimage, 22, 16791693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wagner, A. D., Schacter, D. L., Rotte, M., et al (1998) Building memories: remembering and forgetting of verbal experiences as predicted by brain activity Science, 281, 11881191.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wagner, A. D., Koutstaal, W. & Schacter, D. L. (1999) When encoding yields remembering: insights from event-related neuroimaging. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B Biological Sciences, 354, 13071324.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weiss, A. P. & Heckers, S. (2001) Neuroimaging of declarative memory in schizophrenia. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 42, 239250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiss, A. P., Schacter, D. L., Goff, D. C., et al (2003) Impaired hippocampal recruitment during normal modulation of memory performance in schizophrenia. Biological Psychiatry, 53, 4855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiss, P., Zalesak, M., DeWitt, L., et al (2004) Impaired hippocampal function during the detection of novel words in schizophrenia. Biological Psychiatry, 55, 668675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiser, A. K., Andreasen, N. C., O'Leary, D. S., et al (1998) Dysfunctional cortico-cerebellar circuits cause ‘cognitive dysmetria’ in schizophrenia. Neuroreport, 9, 18951899.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yonelinas, A. P. (2002) The nature of recollection and familiarity: a review of 30 years of research. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 441517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figure 0

Table 1 Studies included in the meta-analysis

Figure 1

Table 2 Thresholds associated with each category of contrasts to which the meta-analysis procedure was applied

Figure 2

Table 3 Overall regions of significant agglomeration of foci of differential activation between participants with schizophrenia and controls during the performance of memory tasks. The foci reported in bold also met the simulation threshold

Figure 3

Table 4 Regions of significant agglomeration of foci of differential activation between participants with schizophrenia and controls for three categories of contrasts. The foci reported in bold also met the simulation threshold

Figure 4

Fig. 1 Regions of significant agglomeration of foci in the overall meta-analysis. The y values given for the coronal slices denote the coordinates in the Talairach/MNI system; the colour range represents the above threshold voxel probability.

Figure 5

Fig. 2 Regions of significant agglomeration of foci in category of contrasts: (a) encoding v. low-level baseline; (b) retrieval v. non-episodic retrieval baseline; (c) high v. low retrieval. The y and x values denote the coordinates in the Talairach/MNI system for the coronal slices and sagittal slices, respectively; the colour ranges represent the above-threshold voxel probability.

Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.
You have Access
151
Cited by