PLoS ONE (Jan 2022)

Language production impairments in patients with a first episode of psychosis.

  • Giulia Gargano,
  • Elisabetta Caletti,
  • Cinzia Perlini,
  • Nunzio Turtulici,
  • Marcella Bellani,
  • Carolina Bonivento,
  • Marco Garzitto,
  • Francesca Marzia Siri,
  • Chiara Longo,
  • Chiara Bonetto,
  • Doriana Cristofalo,
  • Paolo Scocco,
  • Enrico Semrov,
  • Antonio Preti,
  • Lorenza Lazzarotto,
  • Francesco Gardellin,
  • Antonio Lasalvia,
  • Mirella Ruggeri,
  • Andrea Marini,
  • Paolo Brambilla,
  • GET UP Group

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272873
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 17, no. 8
p. e0272873

Abstract

Read online

Language production has often been described as impaired in psychiatric diseases such as in psychosis. Nevertheless, little is known about the characteristics of linguistic difficulties and their relation with other cognitive domains in patients with a first episode of psychosis (FEP), either affective or non-affective. To deepen our comprehension of linguistic profile in FEP, 133 patients with FEP (95 non-affective, FEP-NA; 38 affective, FEP-A) and 133 healthy controls (HC) were assessed with a narrative discourse task. Speech samples were systematically analyzed with a well-established multilevel procedure investigating both micro- (lexicon, morphology, syntax) and macro-linguistic (discourse coherence, pragmatics) levels of linguistic processing. Executive functioning and IQ were also evaluated. Both linguistic and neuropsychological measures were secondarily implemented with a machine learning approach in order to explore their predictive accuracy in classifying participants as FEP or HC. Compared to HC, FEP patients showed language production difficulty at both micro- and macro-linguistic levels. As for the former, FEP produced shorter and simpler sentences and fewer words per minute, along with a reduced number of lexical fillers, compared to HC. At the macro-linguistic level, FEP performance was impaired in local coherence, which was paired with a higher percentage of utterances with semantic errors. Linguistic measures were not correlated with any neuropsychological variables. No significant differences emerged between FEP-NA and FEP-A (p≥0.02, after Bonferroni correction). Machine learning analysis showed an accuracy of group prediction of 76.36% using language features only, with semantic variables being the most impactful. Such a percentage was enhanced when paired with clinical and neuropsychological variables. Results confirm the presence of language production deficits already at the first episode of the illness, being such impairment not related to other cognitive domains. The high accuracy obtained by the linguistic set of features in classifying groups support the use of machine learning methods in neuroscience investigations.