On the basis of their average scores for awareness of current episode symptoms on the Scale to Assess Unawareness of Mental Disorders, patients were divided into two groups: those who were aware of their symptoms (average score ≤3, N=12) and those who were unaware of their symptoms (average score >3, N=18). Groups did not differ in terms of age (aware patients: mean=36.4 years, SD=14.9; unaware patients: mean=33.9 years, SD=9.9) (t=0.55, df=28, p=0.59), full-scale IQ (aware patients: mean=96.0, SD=4.6; unaware patients: mean=93.0, SD=14.3) (t=0.55, df=28, p=0.59), gender composition (aware patients: nine men and three women; unaware patients: 13 men and five women) (χ2=0.03, df=1, p=0.87), or handedness (aware patients: 11 right-handed and one left-handed; unaware patients: 16 right-handed and two left-handed) (χ2=0.59, df=1, p=0.80). All left-handed subjects were men. There was a significant group difference for education; the aware patients were more educated than the unaware patients (mean=13.1 years, SD=2.3; mean=11.3 years, SD=2.8, respectively) (t=2.44, df=28, p=0.03). The patient groups were similar on clinical indices, including total SAPS scores (aware patients: mean=9.4, SD=2.9; unaware patients: mean=10.9, SD=2.8) (t=–1.38, df=28, p=0.18), total SANS scores (aware patients: mean=11.7, SD=3.6; unaware patients: mean=9.5, SD=4.1) (t=1.45, df=28, p=0.16), and BPRS scores (aware patients: mean=41.6, SD=12.0; unaware patients: mean=48.5, SD=7.9) (t=–1.90, df=28, p=0.12).
There was no significant correlation between unawareness of symptoms and education (Pearson’s r=–0.20, p=0.29). Pearson correlations indicated no significant correlations between unawareness of symptoms and either SAPS (r=0.02, p=0.90), SANS (r=–0.03, p=0.88), or BPRS (r=0.30, p=0.10) scores.
Thirteen healthy comparison subjects (no history of psychiatric or neurologic illness or injury) did not differ from the patient groups in terms of age (mean=32.8 years, SD=9.2) (t=–0.41, df=41, p=0.68), sex (12 men and one woman) (χ2=1.97, df=1, p=0.16), or handedness (12 right-handed and one left-handed) (<χ2=0.11, df=1, p=0.81), although they had a higher full-scale IQ, with a mean of 108.3 (SD=8.6) (t=3.64, df=41, p=0.0008). The left-handed comparison subject was also male. The comparison group also had slightly more education (mean=14.5 years, SD=1.8) (t=3.49, df=41, p=0.001) than the unaware patient group.
Analyses of variance (PROC GLM, SAS Systems, Inc., Cary, NC) indicated group differences for both brain size (F=9.11, df=2, 40, p=0.0006) and intracranial volume (F=6.50, df=2, 40, p=0.004). Separate planned comparisons with Bonferroni adjustment indicated that the unaware patient group demonstrated smaller brain size (mean=1219.3 mm
3, SD=156.5) and intracranial volume (mean=1426.6 mm
3, SD=188.5) than either the aware patient group (whole brain mean=1441.1 mm
3, SD=255.3; intracranial volume: mean=1672.1 mm
3, SD=293.2) or the normal comparison subjects (whole brain mean=1497.3 mm
3, SD=175.8; intracranial volume: mean=1674.6 mm
3, SD=185.1), although those two groups did not differ significantly from each other. For comparison of individual brain volumes, see
+Figure 1. Pearson’s correlations were also used to examine awareness as a continuous variable. Inverse correlations were significant for both brain size (r=–0.47, p=0.009) and intracranial volume (r=–0.44, p=0.02); greater unawareness was associated with smaller volumes.
Finally, differences in lobar volumes were examined for the two patient groups. Although significant lobar differences were noted between the aware and unaware patients groups for bilateral frontal, temporal, and parietal lobe tissue volumes, these differences did not remain significant after intracranial volume was entered as a covariate.