ArticlePsychological medicine2022
Relationship between jumping to conclusions and clinical outcomes in people at clinical high-risk for psychosis.
Article in Psychological medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Nonverbal correlates of paranoid ideation - a systematic literature review.Psychological medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Examining sex as a potential moderator of metacognitive training for psychosis efficacy on cognitive insight and jumping to conclusions bias: Evidence from a large-scale harmonized database.Schizophrenia research. Cognition · 2026Article
- Mental health antecedents in first episode of psychosis: impact on prognosis across transitional age.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2026Article
- Jumping to conclusions bias in early psychosis: Relationships with symptom dimensions, neurocognition and social cognition.Schizophrenia research. Cognition · 2026Article
- Cognitive assessment in the Accelerating Medicines Partnership® Schizophrenia Program: harmonization priorities and strategies in a diverse international sample.Schizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Association between Adverse Childhood Experiences and long-term outcomes in people at Clinical High-Risk for Psychosis.Schizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Clinical high risk for psychosis and service disengagement: Incidence and predictors across 2 years of follow-up.Early intervention in psychiatry · 2025Article
- The journey within: mental navigation as a novel framework for understanding psychotherapeutic transformation.BMC psychiatry · 2024Article
- Speech Illusions in People at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis Linked to Clinical Outcome.Schizophrenia bulletin · 2023Article
- Neural Circuitry of Salience and Reward Processing in Psychosis.Biological psychiatry global open science · 2023Review
- Increased Belief Instability in Psychotic Disorders Predicts Treatment Response to Metacognitive Training.Schizophrenia bulletin · 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
- Functional outcomes and subjective recovery of jumping to conclusions in schizophrenia.Schizophrenia research. Cognition · 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
21 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPsychosis is associated with a reasoning bias, which manifests as a tendency to 'jump to conclusions'. We examined this bias in people at clinical high-risk for psychosis (CHR) and investigated its relationship with their clinical outcomes.
methodsIn total, 303 CHR subjects and 57 healthy controls (HC) were included. Both groups were assessed at baseline, and after 1 and 2 years. A 'beads' task was used to assess reasoning bias. Symptoms and level of functioning were assessed using the Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental States scale (CAARMS) and the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF), respectively. During follow up, 58 (16.1%) of the CHR group developed psychosis (CHR-T), and 245 did not (CHR-NT). Logistic regressions, multilevel mixed models, and Cox regression were used to analyse the relationship between reasoning bias and transition to psychosis and level of functioning, at each time point.
resultsThere was no association between reasoning bias at baseline and the subsequent onset of psychosis. However, when assessed after the transition to psychosis, CHR-T participants showed a greater tendency to jump to conclusions than CHR-NT and HC participants (55, 17, 17%; χ2 = 8.13,
conclusionsIn CHR participants, JTC at baseline was associated with adverse functioning at the follow-up. Interventions designed to improve JTC could be beneficial in the CHR population.
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.