ArticleEarly intervention in psychiatry2021
Selection for psychosocial treatment for youth at clinical high risk for psychosis based on the North American Prodrome Longitudinal Study individualized risk calculator.
Article in Early intervention in psychiatry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Family-focused therapy for individuals at high clinical risk for psychosis: A confirmatory efficacy trial.Early intervention in psychiatry · 2022Trial
- Effects of High- versus Low-Intensity Clinician Training on Implementation of Family-Focused Therapy for Youth with Mood and Psychotic Disorders.Family process · 2021Trial
- The TIPS family psychoeducational group work approach in first episode psychosis and related disorders: 25 years of experiences.Early intervention in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Dynamic Prediction of Outcomes for Youth at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis: A Joint Modeling Approach.JAMA psychiatry · 2023Article
- Review of Major Social Determinants of Health in Schizophrenia-Spectrum Psychotic Disorders: I. Clinical Outcomes.Schizophrenia bulletin · 2023Review
- Skills program for awareness, connectedness, and empowerment: A conceptual framework of a skills group for individuals with a psychosis-risk syndrome.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
- Prediction and Prevention in the Clinical High-Risk for Psychosis Paradigm: A Review of the Current Status and Recommendations for Future Directions of Inquiry.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 10 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
aimRecent findings suggest that family-focused therapy (FFT) is effective for individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis (CHR-P). As outcomes of CHR-P individuals are quite varied, certain psychosocial interventions may be differentially effective in subgroups. The present study examined change in positive symptoms for CHR-P individuals at different levels of predicted risk for conversion to psychosis who received either FFT, a brief form of family education termed enhanced care (EC) or treatment as usual.
methodsParticipants were drawn from the North American Prodromal Longitudinal Study (NAPLS2). A subset of NAPLS2 participants completed a randomized study involving FFT or EC. The present study includes participants from the FFT-CHR sub-study and non-randomized NAPLS2 participants. Predicted risk of conversion was calculated using the Individualized Risk Calculator for Psychosis. Robust linear regressions evaluated whether the association between predicted risk of conversion and positive symptom change differed across intervention groups.
resultsA total of 94 participants from the FFT-CHR sub-study (FFT-CHR n = 50, EC n = 44) and 401 non-randomized NAPLS2 participants were included in this study. There was a treatment group by predicted risk of conversion interaction that predicted positive symptom improvement: higher risk individuals improved more with FFT-CHR than EC or the non-randomized NAPLS group, whereas lower-risk individuals did not differ in positive symptom improvement across treatment groups (FFT-CHR vs EC: P = .03, β = 20.27; FFT-CHR vs NAPLS2: P < .001, β = 28.40).
conclusionsIntensive treatments such as FFT-CHR may be most appropriate for individuals at the highest levels of clinical risk for psychosis.
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.