ArticleSchizophrenia bulletin2020
Enhancing Psychosis Risk Prediction Through Computational Cognitive Neuroscience.
Article in Schizophrenia bulletin, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Neuropsychological Performance Among Individuals at Clinical High-Risk for Psychosis vs Putatively Low-Risk Peers With Other Psychopathology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Schizophrenia bulletin · 2022Pooled it
- The effect of monetary versus point-based rewards on effort-cost decision making in individuals at clinical high risk for psychosis.Schizophrenia research · 2026Trial
- Computational phenotypes underlying effort-based decision-making and negative symptoms in a transdiagnostic severe mental illness sample.Molecular psychiatry · 2026Article
- DifferentialScience advances · 2026Article
- Expressive writing combined with digital cognitive therapy in patients with schizophrenia: a narrative review of efficacy, linguistic phenotypes, and adherence modulators.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Review
- Identifying individuals at clinical high risk for psychosis using a battery of tasks sensitive to symptom mechanisms.Translational psychiatry · 2025Article
- Increased face perception in individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis: mechanisms, sex differences, and clinical correlates.Schizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Clinical symptoms of the prodromal stage preceding serious mental illness in Taiwanese young adults: a qualitative study.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- Probabalistic reinforcement learning impairments predict negative symptom severity and risk for conversion in youth at clinical high-risk for psychosis.Psychological medicine · 2025Article
- Impaired motor-to-sensory transformation mediates auditory hallucinations.PLoS biology · 2024Article
- Racial differences in attenuated psychotic symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic.Early intervention in psychiatry · 2024Article
- Development and Validation of the Negative Symptom Inventory-Psychosis Risk.Schizophrenia bulletin · 2023Article
- The reliability and validity of the revised Green et al. paranoid thoughts scale in individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis.Acta psychiatrica Scandinavica · 2023Article
- Studying Healthy Psychosislike Experiences to Improve Illness Prediction.JAMA psychiatry · 2023Article
- Assumed shared belief about conspiracy theories in social networks protects paranoid individuals against distress.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Item-level endorsement on the Prodromal Questionnaire in a large non-clinical sample.Schizophrenia research · 2022Article
- Translating RDoC to Real-World Impact in Developmental Psychopathology: A Neurodevelopmental Framework for Application of Mental Health Risk Calculators.Development and psychopathology · 2021Article
- The COVID-19 Pandemic Introduces Diagnostic and Treatment Planning Complexity for Individuals at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis.Schizophrenia bulletin · 2021Article
- Enhancing Prediction of Psychosis Risk With Cognitive Measures: How Do We Get to There From Here?JAMA psychiatry · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Research suggests that early identification and intervention with individuals at clinical high risk (CHR) for psychosis may be able to improve the course of illness. The first generation of studies suggested that the identification of CHR through the use of specialized interviews evaluating attenuated psychosis symptoms is a promising strategy for exploring mechanisms associated with illness progression, etiology, and identifying new treatment targets. The next generation of research on psychosis risk must address two major limitations: (1) interview methods have limited specificity, as recent estimates indicate that only 15%-30% of individuals identified as CHR convert to psychosis and (2) the expertise needed to make CHR diagnosis is only accessible in a handful of academic centers. Here, we introduce a new approach to CHR assessment that has the potential to increase accessibility and positive predictive value. Recent advances in clinical and computational cognitive neuroscience have generated new behavioral measures that assay the cognitive mechanisms and neural systems that underlie the positive, negative, and disorganization symptoms that are characteristic of psychotic disorders. We hypothesize that measures tied to symptom generation will lead to enhanced sensitivity and specificity relative to interview methods and the cognitive intermediate phenotype measures that have been studied to date that are typically indicators of trait vulnerability and, therefore, have a high false positive rate for conversion to psychosis. These new behavioral measures have the potential to be implemented on the internet and at minimal expense, thereby increasing accessibility of assessments.
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.