Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32173346›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage. Clinical2020

The benefit of foresight? An ethical evaluation of predictive testing for psychosis in clinical practice.

Natalie M Lane, Stuart A Hunter, Stephen M Lawrie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage. Clinical, 2020. 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
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Ethical trade-offs in AI for mental health.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Preventive psychiatry: a blueprint for improving the mental health of young people.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 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

3 authors.

Natalie M LaneDepartment of Psychiatry, NHS Lanarkshire, Glasgow, Scotland G71 8BB, United Kingdom. Electronic address: natalie.lane@nhs.net.
Stuart A HunterDepartment of Psychiatry, NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, Scotland EH1 3EG, United Kingdom.
Stephen M LawrieDivision of Psychiatry, University of Edinburgh, Royal Edinburgh Hospital, Edinburgh, Scotland EH10 5HF, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Risk prediction for psychosis has advanced to the stage at which it could feasibly become a clinical reality. Neuroimaging biomarkers play a central role in many risk prediction models. Using such models to predict the likelihood of transition to psychosis in individuals known to be at high risk has the potential to meaningfully improve outcomes, principally through facilitating early intervention. However, this compelling benefit must be evaluated in light of the broader ethical ramifications of this prospective development in clinical practice. This paper advances ethical discussion in the field in two ways: firstly, through in-depth consideration of the distinctive implications of the clinical application of predictive tools; and, secondly, by evaluating the manner in which newer predictive models incorporating neuroimaging alter the ethical landscape. We outline the current state of the science of predictive testing for psychosis, with a particular focus on emerging neuroimaging biomarkers. We then proceed to ethical analysis employing the four principles of biomedical ethics as a conceptual framework. We conclude with a call for scientific advancement to proceed in tandem with ethical consideration, informed by empirical study of the views of high risk individuals and their families. This collaborative approach will help ensure that predictive testing progresses in an ethically acceptable manner that minimizes potential adverse effects and maximizes meaningful benefits for those at high risk of psychosis.

Indexed as

Early Medical InterventionEthics, MedicalProfessional-Patient RelationsAdultBiomarkersHumansNeuroimagingPrognosisPsychotic DisordersRisk AssessmentSchizophreniaBiomarkersEarly interventionEthicsNeuroimagingPredictionPsychosisSchizophrenia

Identifiers

PMID32173346
PMCPMC7229349

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.