Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30071747›Full record

ArticleCanadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie2019

Treatment History of Youth At-Risk for Serious Mental Illness.

Megan S Farris, Glenda MacQueen, Benjamin I Goldstein, JianLi Wang, Sidney H Kennedy, Signe Bray, Catherine Lebel, Jean Addington

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Longitudinal Trends in Medication Treatment for Youth At-Risk for Serious Mental Illness.Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie · 2021
    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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Megan S Farris1 Department of Psychiatry, Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Glenda MacQueen1 Department of Psychiatry, Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Benjamin I Goldstein2 Centre for Youth Bipolar Disorder, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
JianLi Wang4 Work & Mental health Research Unit, Institute of Mental Health Research, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Sidney H Kennedy6 Department of Psychiatry, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Signe Bray1 Department of Psychiatry, Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Catherine Lebel1 Department of Psychiatry, Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Jean Addington1 Department of Psychiatry, Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
University of Calgary · CASt. Michael's Hospital · CASunnybrook Health Science Centre · CAUniversity of Ottawa · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe aim was to describe treatment history including medications, psychosocial therapy and hospital visits of participants in the Canadian Psychiatric Risk and Outcomes Study (PROCAN).

methodsPROCAN is a 2-site study of 243 youth/young adults aged 12 to 25 y, categorized into 4 groups: healthy controls ( n = 42), stage 0 (non-help seeking, asymptomatic with risk mainly family history of serious mental illness (SMI); n = 41), stage 1a (distress disorders; n = 52) and stage 1b (attenuated syndromes; n = 108). Participants were interviewed regarding lifetime and current treatments, including medications, psychosocial therapies and hospital visits.

resultsThe number receiving baseline medications differed significantly across groups ( P < 0.001): 0% healthy controls, 14.6% stage 0, 32.7% stage 1a and 34.3% stage 1b. Further, 26.9% and 49.1% of stage 1a and stage 1b participants received psychosocial therapy at baseline, indicative of statistically significant differences among the groups ( P < 0.001). Similar results were observed for lifetime treatment history; stage 1b participants had the highest frequency of lifetime treatment. Medications started in adulthood (>18 y of age) were the most common for initiation of treatment compared to childhood (0 to 12 y) and adolescence (13 to 17 y) for stage 1a and 1b participants. Lifetime mental health hospital visits differed significantly across groups ( P < 0.001) and were most common in stage 1b participants (29.6%) followed by stage 1a (13.5%), stage 0 (4.9%) and healthy controls (2.4%).

conclusionWe found that treatment history for participants in the PROCAN study differed among the at-risk groups. Future initiatives focused on determining the effects of treatment history on SMI are warranted.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultCanadaChildDrug PrescriptionsFemaleHospitalizationHumansMaleMental DisordersPatient Acceptance of Health CarePsychotherapyPsychotropic DrugsRiskYoung AdultPsychotropic Drugsclinically high-riskhospital visitsmedicationspsychosispsychosocial therapyserious mental illnesstreatment history

Identifiers

PMID30071747
PMCPMC6405799
OpenAlexW2886418749

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.