Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28355424›Full record

ArticleJAMA psychiatry2017

Development and Validation of a Clinically Based Risk Calculator for the Transdiagnostic Prediction of Psychosis.

Paolo Fusar-Poli, Grazia Rutigliano, Daniel Stahl, Cathy Davies, Ilaria Bonoldi, Thomas Reilly, Philip McGuire

Erratum issuedOpen access · greenAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA psychiatry, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 134 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
134citing papers in PubMed, 13 pooled it
22.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

134 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 241 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

74 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Paolo Fusar-PoliEarly Psychosis: Interventions and Clinical Detection Lab, Department of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, England.
Grazia RutiglianoEarly Psychosis: Interventions and Clinical Detection Lab, Department of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, England.
Daniel StahlNational Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre for Mental Health, IoPPN, King's College London, London, England.
Cathy DaviesEarly Psychosis: Interventions and Clinical Detection Lab, Department of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, England.
Ilaria BonoldiEarly Psychosis: Interventions and Clinical Detection Lab, Department of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, England.
Thomas ReillyEarly Psychosis: Interventions and Clinical Detection Lab, Department of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, England.
Philip McGuireDepartment of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, England.
King's College London · GBCentre for Mental Health · GBSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Pisa · IT

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/N026063/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: The overall effect of At Risk Mental State (ARMS) services for the detection of individuals who will develop psychosis in secondary mental health care is undetermined. Objective: To measure the proportion of individuals with a first episode of psychosis detected by ARMS services in secondary mental health services, and to develop and externally validate a practical web-based individualized risk calculator tool for the transdiagnostic prediction of psychosis in secondary mental health care. Design, Setting, and Participants: Clinical register-based cohort study. Patients were drawn from electronic, real-world, real-time clinical records relating to 2008 to 2015 routine secondary mental health care in the South London and the Maudsley National Health Service Foundation Trust. The study included all patients receiving a first index diagnosis of nonorganic and nonpsychotic mental disorder within the South London and the Maudsley National Health Service Foundation Trust in the period between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2015. Data analysis began on September 1, 2016. Main Outcomes and Measures: Risk of development of nonorganic International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision psychotic disorders. Results: A total of 91 199 patients receiving a first index diagnosis of nonorganic and nonpsychotic mental disorder within South London and the Maudsley National Health Service Foundation Trust were included in the derivation (n = 33 820) or external validation (n = 54 716) data sets. The mean age was 32.97 years, 50.88% were men, and 61.05% were white race/ethnicity. The mean follow-up was 1588 days. The overall 6-year risk of psychosis in secondary mental health care was 3.02 (95% CI, 2.88-3.15), which is higher than the 6-year risk in the local general population (0.62). Compared with the ARMS designation, all of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision diagnoses showed a lower risk of psychosis, with the exception of bipolar mood disorders (similar risk) and brief psychotic episodes (higher risk). The ARMS designation accounted only for a small proportion of transitions to psychosis (n = 52 of 1001; 5.19% in the derivation data set), indicating the need for transdiagnostic prediction of psychosis in secondary mental health care. A prognostic risk stratification model based on preselected variables, including index diagnosis, age, sex, age by sex, and race/ethnicity, was developed and externally validated, showing good performance and potential clinical usefulness. Conclusions and Relevance: This online individualized risk calculator can be of clinical usefulness for the transdiagnostic prediction of psychosis in secondary mental health care. The risk calculator can help to identify those patients at risk of developing psychosis who require an ARMS assessment and specialized care. The use of this calculator may eventually facilitate the implementation of an individualized provision of preventive focused interventions and improve outcomes of first episode psychosis.

Indexed as

Mental Health ServicesAdolescentAdultFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansInternetLondonMaleMental DisordersMiddle AgedPrognosisPsychotic DisordersRegistriesReproducibility of ResultsRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID28355424
PMCPMC5470394
OpenAlexW2593674607

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.