ArticleEuropean child & adolescent psychiatry2019
Clinical high risk for psychosis in childhood and adolescence: findings from the 2-year follow-up of the ReARMS project.
Article in European child & adolescent psychiatry, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Negative Prognostic Effect of Baseline Antipsychotic Exposure in Clinical High Risk for Psychosis (CHR-P): Is Pre-Test Risk Enrichment the Hidden Culprit?The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology · 2021Pooled it
- Investigating Aberrant Salience in Autism Spectrum Disorder and Psychosis Risk: A Cross-Group Analysis.Early intervention in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Clinical symptoms of the prodromal stage preceding serious mental illness in Taiwanese young adults: a qualitative study.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- The influence of complex psychiatric comorbidities on treatment for clinical high-risk for psychosis: A preliminary study.Early intervention in psychiatry · 2024Article
- Depressive Features in Individuals with First Episode Psychosis: Psychopathological and Treatment Considerations from A 2-Year Follow-Up Study.Clinical neuropsychiatry · 2023Article
- Negative symptoms in first episode schizophrenia: treatment response across the 2-year follow-up of the "Parma Early Psychosis" program.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2022Article
- Traumatic experiences in childhood and the development of psychosis spectrum disorders.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2022Article
- Hallucinations in the Child and Adolescent "Ultra-High Risk" population: A Systematic Review.Schizophrenia bulletin open · 2022Review
- Negative Symptom Domains in Children and Adolescents at Ultra-High Risk for Psychosis: Association With Real-Life Functioning.Schizophrenia bulletin open · 2022Article
- Prognostic Accuracy of DSM-5 Attenuated Psychosis Syndrome in Adolescents: Prospective Real-World 5-Year Cohort Study.Schizophrenia bulletin · 2021Article
- Negative symptom configuration in patients with first episode affective psychosis: findings from the 1-year follow-up of the "Parma Early Psychosis" program.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2021Article
- Subjective experience of social cognition in adolescents at ultra-high risk of psychosis: findings from a 24-month follow-up study.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2020Article
- What happened to the concept of adolescence crisis?European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2020Article
- Clinical profile, conversion rate, and suicidal thinking and behaviour in children and adolescents at ultra-high risk for psychosis: a theoretical perspective.Research in psychotherapy (Milano) · 2020Article
- Clinical high risk for psychosis model in children and adolescents: a joint position statement of ESCAP Clinical Division and Research Academy.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2020Article
- Familiarity for Serious Mental Illness in Help-Seeking Adolescents at Clinical High Risk of Psychosis.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2020Article
- Antipsychotic Treatment in People at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis: A Narrative Review of Suggestions for Clinical Practice.Journal of clinical psychopharmacologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The clinical significance and the prognostic value of clinical high risk (CHR) for psychosis, while substantially corroborated in adults, remains less firmly established in children and early adolescents. This follow-up study, developed within the Reggio Emilia At Risk Mental States project, is meant to contribute to the reduction of such lacuna, and has two main aims: (1) to characterize the clinical profile of help seekers [stratified in non-CHR, CHR and first episode psychosis (FEP)] referred to child-adolescent mental health services; and (2) to monitor the cumulative transition rate from CHR to FEP in adolescents at the follow-up of 12 and 24 months. 112 adolescents (aged 13-18 years) were assessed with the Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental States and the Schizophrenia Proneness Instrument, Child and Youth version. 51 subjects met CHR criteria (45.5% of the sample) and 33 subjects met FEP criteria (29.5%) at baseline. The criterial transition rate from CHR to FEP was 7% over 12 months and 13% over 24 months; higher rates of cumulative transition were detected when also functional transition (indexed by the consensual introduction of antipsychotic medication by the treating clinical staff) was considered. The identification of CHR for psychosis in help-seeking adolescents is feasible and clinically relevant. Studies conducted in real world, publicly funded components of the national health system, should take into consideration not only criterial, psychometric transition, but also functional equivalents of transition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30506419What 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.