ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2019
Individual Differences and Psychosis-Risk Screening: Practical Suggestions to Improve the Scope and Quality of Early Identification.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Psychosis-like experiences and resilience: A systematic and critical review of the literature.Psychological services · 2022Pooled it
- Identifying individuals at clinical high risk for psychosis using a battery of tasks sensitive to symptom mechanisms.Translational psychiatry · 2025Article
- Clinical symptoms of the prodromal stage preceding serious mental illness in Taiwanese young adults: a qualitative study.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- Identification of Psychosis Risk and Diagnosis of First-Episode Psychosis: Advice for Clinicians.Psychology research and behavior management · 2024Review
- Review of factors resulting in systemic biases in the screening, assessment, and treatment of individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis in the United States.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Review
- Item-level endorsement on the Prodromal Questionnaire in a large non-clinical sample.Schizophrenia research · 2022Article
- Three prominent self-report risk measures show unique and overlapping utility in characterizing those at clinical high-risk for psychosis.Schizophrenia research · 2022Article
- Equity in Mental Health Services for Youth at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis: Considering Marginalized Identities and Stressors.Evidence-based practice in child and adolescent mental health · 2022Article
- Screening for Early Emerging Mental Experiences (SEE ME): A Model to Improve Early Detection of Psychosis in Integrated Primary Care.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Article
- Sensorimotor and Activity Psychosis-Risk (SMAP-R) Scale: An Exploration of Scale Structure With Replication and Validation.Schizophrenia bulletin · 2021Article
- Prevalence and Functional Consequences of Social Anxiety in Individuals at Clinical High-Risk for Psychosis: Perspective From a Community Sample Comparison.Schizophrenia bulletin open · 2021Article
- Community Psychosis Risk Screening: An Instrument Development Investigation.Journal of psychiatry and brain science · 2020Article
- A Public Health Perspective on Screening for Psychosis Within General Practice Clinics.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2019Article
- Advances in clinical staging, early intervention, and the prevention of psychosis.F1000Research · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Approaches to identifying individuals at clinical high-risk (CHR) for psychosis currently do not carefully weigh considerations around individual differences. Effective identification depends on awareness of factors beyond psychopathology as it is reflected in the current literature, such as sensitivity to idiographic circumstances and individual differences. The inability to address contextual factors when employing the status quo method of identification likely contributes to the unacceptably poor accuracy when identifying people at CHR. Individual differences related to factors such as culture, race, comorbidity, and development likely play an important role in accurate identification, and have the potential to improve the validity of approaches intended to identify this population. Tailored approaches to assessment based on an awareness of context, identity, setting, and preferences of clients are possible, and customizing assessment efforts accordingly may be useful for accurate identification of people at CHR. Highlighting the potential for the existing early identification paradigm to marginalize or misunderstand certain groups, we describe how effective identification and ethical diagnosis require sensitivity to individual differences writ large. We suggest that recognizing the importance of these factors advances a more inclusive and accurate approach to identification.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.