Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29649252›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2018

Prevalence of psychotic disorders and its association with methodological issues. A systematic review and meta-analyses.

Berta Moreno-Küstner, Carlos Martín, Loly Pastor

Abstract readMulticenter StudySystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 270 papers, 23 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
270citing papers in PubMed, 23 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

270 citing papers in PubMed, 23 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  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. Prevalence of schizophrenia spectrum and other psychotic disorders in problem gambling: A systematic review and meta-analysis.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2024
    Pooled it
  10. Collaborative care approaches for people with severe mental illness.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Pooled it
  20. Pooled it

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Berta Moreno-KüstnerDepartment of Personality, Assessment and Psychological Treatment, University of Malaga, Málaga, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-9541-215X
Carlos MartínAndalusian Health Service, North East Granada Sanitary District, Clinical Management Unit at Marquesado, Alquife, Granada, Spain.
Loly PastorDepartment of Personality, Assessment and Psychological Treatment, University of Malaga, Málaga, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe purpose of this study is to provide an updated systematic review to identify studies describing the prevalence of psychosis in order to explore methodological factors that could account for the variation in prevalence estimates.

methodsStudies with original data related to the prevalence of psychosis (published between 1990 and 2015) were identified via searching electronic databases and reviewing manual citations. Prevalence estimates were sorted according to prevalence type (point, 12-months and lifetime). The independent association between key methodological variables and the mean effect of prevalence was examined (prevalence type, case-finding setting, method of confirming diagnosis, international classification of diseases, diagnosis category, and study quality) by meta-analytical techniques and random-effects meta-regression.

resultsSeventy-three primary studies were included, providing a total of 101 estimates of prevalence rates of psychosis. Across these studies, the pooled median point and 12-month prevalence for persons was 3.89 and 4.03 per 1000 respectively; and the median lifetime prevalence was 7.49 per 1000. The result of the random-effects meta-regression analysis revealed a significant effect for the prevalence type, with higher rates of lifetime prevalence than 12-month prevalence (p<0.001). Studies conducted in the general population presented higher prevalence rates than those carried out in populations attended in health/social services (p = 0.006). Compared to the diagnosis of schizophrenia only, prevalence rates were higher in the probable psychotic disorder (p = 0.022) and non-affective psychosis (p = 0.009). Finally, a higher study quality is associated with a lower estimated prevalence of psychotic disorders (p<0.001).

conclusionsThis systematic review provides a comprehensive comparison of methodologies used in studies of the prevalence of psychosis, which can provide insightful information for future epidemiological studies in adopting the most relevant methodological approach.

Indexed as

Epidemiologic StudiesHumansPrevalencePsychotic Disorders

Identifiers

PMID29649252
PMCPMC5896987

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.