Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29656729›Full record

ArticleEpidemiology and psychiatric sciences2019

'False-positive' self-reported psychotic experiences in the general population: an investigation of outcome, predictive factors and clinical relevance.

Y van der Steen, I Myin-Germeys, M van Nierop, M Ten Have, R de Graaf, S van Dorsselaer, J van Os, R van Winkel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Describing Psychotic Experiences Through Online Psychosis Screens: A Content Analysis.International journal of methods in psychiatric research · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

8 authors.

Y van der SteenDepartment of Psychiatry & Neuropsychology, Maastricht University, School for Mental Health and Neuroscience (MHeNS), Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9285-5513
I Myin-GermeysDepartment of Neuroscience, KU Leuven, Research Group Psychiatry, Center for Contextual Psychiatry, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3731-4930
M van NieropDepartment of Neuroscience, KU Leuven, Research Group Psychiatry, Center for Contextual Psychiatry, Leuven, Belgium.
M Ten HaveNetherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
R de GraafNetherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
S van DorsselaerNetherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
J van OsDepartment of Psychiatry & Neuropsychology, Maastricht University, School for Mental Health and Neuroscience (MHeNS), Maastricht, The Netherlands.
R van WinkelUniversity Psychiatric Center, KU Leuven, Campus Kortenberg, Leuvensesteenweg, Kortenberg, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

AIMS.: Self-reported psychotic experiences (SRPE) by individuals from the general population are often unconfirmed by clinical interview and referred to as 'false-positive' (FP) SRPE. FP SRPE have been suggested to represent the mildest form of risk along the extended psychosis continuum. However, little is known about their (clinical) outcome and evolution over time. Aims of this study were to prospectively examine, in individuals with FP SRPE, (1) the prevalence of remission, persistence and transition to validated PE at 3-year follow-up; (2) potential baseline psychopathological and psychosocial predictors of persistence of FP SRPE and transition to validated PE; and (3) whether those with persistent FP SRPE and validated PE already differed on psychopathology and psychosocial factors at baseline. We tested the hypotheses that (i) individuals with FP SRPE would be more likely to have SRPE and validated PE at follow-up; and (ii) that FP SRPE would be predictive of lower functioning and more psychopathology and help-seeking behaviour at follow-up. METHODS.: Baseline (n = 6646) and 3-year follow-up (n = 5303) data of the second the Netherlands Mental Health Survey and Incidence Study (NEMESIS-2), a general population research project on prevalence, incidence, course and consequences of psychiatric disorders was used. Self-report of PE was followed by clinical interview to determine clinical validity. The presence of mood, anxiety and substance use disorders, childhood adversity, help-seeking and functioning as well as PE characteristics (number, frequency, distress and impact) were used in the analyses which included only individuals with complete data for both assessments waves (n = 4683). RESULTS.: At baseline, 454 participants had any FP SRPE; of these 372 participants had complete follow-up data available. Those with baseline FP SRPE were significantly more likely to report SRPE (OR = 3.58; 95% CI 2.38-5.40, p < 0.001) and validated PE (OR = 6.26; 95% CI 3.91-10.02, p < 0.001) at follow-up. Baseline FP SRPE also predicted the presence of mood and anxiety disorders, reduced functioning and help-seeking at follow-up. Several baseline psychopathological, psychosocial and PE characteristics were predictive for the persistence of SRPE. These factors also differentiated groups with FP SRPE or validated PE from those with remitted FP SRPE at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS.: 'FP SRPE' are not truly 'false' as they index risk for the development of clinically relevant psychotic symptoms, development of mood and anxiety disorders and reduced functioning. Self-reported PE, even unconfirmed, warrant 'watchful waiting' and follow-up over time, especially when they are reported by individuals with reduced psychosocial functioning and general psychiatric problems.

Indexed as

PsychopathologyAdultAnxietyAnxiety DisordersCohort StudiesDepressionFemaleHumansPrevalenceProspective StudiesPsychiatric Status Rating ScalesPsychotic DisordersQuality of LifeSelf ReportStress, PsychologicalSubstance-Related DisordersEpidemiologypersistencepsychotic experiencestransition

Identifiers

PMID29656729
PMCPMC6998918

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.