Table 3.
Table 3 Large consistent effect sizes from meta-analyses of brain imaging studies in patients versus controls
| Effect sizevs. controls | Different from relatives | Evident at first episode | Specificity vs. affective disorder | Other issues | |
| sMRI regional brain volumes | Up to 0.86, some with heterogeneity (Wright et al, 76) | Yes, at least hippocampus and ventricles | Yes, at least hippocampus and ventricles | Amygdala volume may discriminate but may depend on age and treatment | Pattern recognition methods may be more powerful |
| Hypofrontality | 0.64 at rest; | Yes | Yes | DLPFC activity | Performance level |
| 1.13 when active | possibly | needs to be | |||
| (Zakzanis and Heinrichs, 85) | allowed for | ||||
| Mismatch | 0.99 | Possible | Possible, but some | Possible | |
| negativity | (Umbricht and | possible | |||
| Krljes, 98) | progression | ||||
| sMRI – structural magnetic resonance imaging; DLPFC – dorsolateral prefrontal cortex | |||||