ReviewAMA journal of ethics2016
Ethical and Epidemiological Dimensions of Labeling Psychosis Risk.
Review in AMA journal of ethics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Positive Reframing of Psychosis Risk Reduces Social Stigma and Desire for Social Distance Among Adolescents: Moderating Roles of Prodromal Experiences, Sex, and Culture.Early intervention in psychiatry · 2026Trial
- Positive Reframing of Psychosis Risk is Perceived as Less Frightening and Stigmatising Than Negative Framing by Adolescents With and Without Prodromal Symptoms: An Experimental Simulated Feedback Study.Early intervention in psychiatry · 2025Trial
- Exploring the Effect of Brief Preventive Videos on Mental Health Help-Seeking for Early Psychosis in a Young Community Sample.Early intervention in psychiatry · 2025Trial
- Effect of Technology-Enhanced Screening in Addition to Standard Targeted Clinician Education on the Duration of Untreated Psychosis: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA psychiatry · 2023Trial
- Positive Reframing of Psychosis Risk Is Seen as More Beneficial and Less Harmful Than Negative Framing by Clinicians: An Experimental Videotaped Simulated Feedback Study.Schizophrenia bulletin · 2025Article
- Negative symptoms and self-reflection increase alienation in individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Ethical challenges in contemporary psychiatry: an overview and an appraisal of possible strategies and research needs.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2024Article
- Psychoeducation for individuals at clinical high risk for psychosis: A scoping review.Schizophrenia research · 2023Article
- Clinical high risk for psychosis paradigm for CAP: do not throw the baby out with the bathwater.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2022Article
- Emotional and stigma-related experiences relative to being told one is at risk for psychosis.Schizophrenia research · 2021Article
- Counterpoint. Early intervention for psychosis risk syndromes: Minimizing risk and maximizing benefit.Schizophrenia research · 2021Article
- The reality of at risk mental state services: a response to recent criticisms.Psychological medicine · 2021Article
- Shared Decision Making With Young People at Ultra High Risk of Psychotic Disorder.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Article
- European Psychiatric Association policy paper on ethical aspects in communication with patients and their families.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2020Article
- The benefit of foresight? An ethical evaluation of predictive testing for psychosis in clinical practice.NeuroImage. Clinical · 2020Article
- Prevalence and clinical relevance of interview-assessed psychosis-risk symptoms in the young adult community.Psychological medicine · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The past two decades have marked an increase in research on the prodromal stages of schizophrenia that precede a first episode of psychosis. Criteria for a clinical high risk (CHR) state for psychosis have been validated and included in the DSM-5 as the attenuated psychosis syndrome and as requiring further study. This was hotly debated, given the concern of stigmatizing young people who would receive this psychosis risk label. In this article, I review ethical issues related to the psychosis risk label, including the potential harm of stigma and paternalism if risk labels are withheld in the context of the observed low predictive power of the psychosis risk designation. I review data that supports that the psychosis risk label need not be harmful, and could even confer benefit, and set out strategies for reducing stigma through individualized risk assessment and public health education.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.