Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31214062›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2019

A Mentalization-Informed Staging Approach to Clinical High Risk for Psychosis.

Marco Armando, Joost Hutsebaut, Martin Debbané

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
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.

Marco ArmandoDepartment of Psychiatry, Developmental Imaging and Psychopathology Lab, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Joost HutsebautViersprong Institute for Studies on Personality Disorders (VISPD), MBT Netherlands, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Martin DebbanéDepartment of Psychiatry, Developmental Imaging and Psychopathology Lab, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The practice of diagnosis is fundamentally designed to orient treatment. In the case of early diagnosis for schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSP) risk, the empirical base for such a practice is still young, and many clinical questions arise in the everyday clinical application of risk algorithms and ensuing therapeutic options. One of the key questions that we will focus on is the following: in cases of SSP where symptoms are successfully treated, why does residual social functioning impairment remain the most serious obstacle to remission and reinsertion in society? We will present the evidence suggesting that the roots of residual social functioning impairment may, in many cases, come from thwarted or arrested development in the specialization of social cognition during adolescence and early adulthood. We will review the evidence suggesting that both during the premorbid phase and clinical high-risk phase, attenuated psychotic symptoms may impede the maturation of key social cognitive processes, particularly the suite of reflective thinking processes coming under the term of mentalization. From this evidence base, we will adapt the staging model of SSP progression in function of our mentalization-informed model, tailored to provide a coherent framework of care addressing the key clinical needs at every stage of psychosis progression.

Indexed as

early interventionmentalizingschizophreniasocial functioningtreatment

Identifiers

PMID31214062
PMCPMC6555089

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.