Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33219222›Full record

ArticleNPJ schizophrenia2020

Understanding sex differences in long-term outcomes after a first episode of psychosis.

Rosa Ayesa-Arriola, Víctor Ortíz-García de la Foz, Esther Setién-Suero, María Luz Ramírez-Bonilla, Paula Suárez-Pinilla, Jacqueline Mayoral-van Son, Javier Vázquez-Bourgon, María Juncal-Ruiz, Marcos Gómez-Revuelta, Diana Tordesillas-Gutiérrez and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NPJ schizophrenia, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

11 authors.

Rosa Ayesa-ArriolaDepartment of Psychiatry, Marqués de Valdecilla University Hospital, IDIVAL. School of Medicine, University of Cantabria, Santander, Spain. rayesa@idival.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0570-5352
Víctor Ortíz-García de la FozDepartment of Psychiatry, Marqués de Valdecilla University Hospital, IDIVAL. School of Medicine, University of Cantabria, Santander, Spain.
Esther Setién-SueroDepartment of Psychiatry, Marqués de Valdecilla University Hospital, IDIVAL. School of Medicine, University of Cantabria, Santander, Spain.
María Luz Ramírez-BonillaDepartment of Psychiatry, Marqués de Valdecilla University Hospital, IDIVAL. School of Medicine, University of Cantabria, Santander, Spain.
Paula Suárez-PinillaDepartment of Psychiatry, Marqués de Valdecilla University Hospital, IDIVAL. School of Medicine, University of Cantabria, Santander, Spain.
Jacqueline Mayoral-van SonCIBERSAM, Centro InvestigaciónBiomédicaen Red Salud Mental, Madrid, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3071-4197
Javier Vázquez-BourgonDepartment of Psychiatry, Marqués de Valdecilla University Hospital, IDIVAL. School of Medicine, University of Cantabria, Santander, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5478-3376
María Juncal-RuizSierrallana Hospital, Department of Psychiatry, IDIVAL, School of Medicine, University of Cantabria, Torrelavega, Spain.
Marcos Gómez-RevueltaDepartment of Psychiatry, Marqués de Valdecilla University Hospital, IDIVAL. School of Medicine, University of Cantabria, Santander, Spain.
Diana Tordesillas-GutiérrezDepartment of Psychiatry, Marqués de Valdecilla University Hospital, IDIVAL. School of Medicine, University of Cantabria, Santander, Spain.
Benedicto Crespo-FacorroCIBERSAM, Centro InvestigaciónBiomédicaen Red Salud Mental, Madrid, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While sex differences in schizophrenia have long been reported and discussed, long-term sex differences in outcomes among first episode of psychosis (FEP) patients in terms of the efficacy of Early Intervention Services (EIS) has been an under-explored area. A total of 209 FEP patients (95 females and 114 males) were reassessed after a time window ranging from 8 to 16 years after their first contact with an EIS program (PAFIP) that we will call the 10-year PAFIP cohort. Multiple clinical, cognitive, functioning, premorbid, and sociodemographic variables were explored at 1-year, 3-year and 10-year follow-ups. At first contact, females were older at illness onset, had higher premorbid adjustment and IQ, and were more frequently employed, living independently, and accompanied by a partner and/or children. Existence of a schizophrenia diagnosis, and cannabis and alcohol consumption were more probable among men. During the first 3 years, women showed a significantly better response to minimal antipsychotic dosages and higher rates of recovery than men (50% vs. 30.8%). Ten years later, more females continued living independently and had partners, while schizophrenia diagnoses and cannabis consumption continued to be more frequent among men. Females also presented a lower severity of negative symptoms; however, functionality and recovery differences did not show significant differences (46.7% vs. 34.4%). Between the 3- and 10-year follow-up sessions, an increase in dosage of antipsychotics was observed. These results suggest that the better outcomes seen among women during the first 3 years (while they were treated in an EIS) were in the presence of more favourable premorbid and baseline characteristics. After an average period of 10 years, with the only difference being in negative symptoms course, outcomes for women approximated those of men, drawing particular attention to the increase in dosage of antipsychotic medication once FEP patients were discharged from the EIS program towards community-based services. These findings help to pose the question of whether it is advisable to target sexes and lengthen EIS interventions.

Identifiers

PMID33219222
PMCPMC7679369

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.