ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2024
External validation of a prognostic model to improve prediction of psychosis: a retrospective cohort study in primary care.
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- External Validation of SELECT Trial-Derived Cardiovascular Risk Equations in a UK Population with Overweight or Obesity and Established Cardiovascular Disease Without Diabetes.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Article
- Predicting risk of psychosis in primary care: a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026Article
- Multimodal Prediction of Psychosis in the Prospective MoBa Birth Cohort.Research square · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEarly detection could reduce the duration of untreated psychosis. GPs are a vital part of the psychosis care pathway, but find it difficult to detect the early features. An accurate risk prediction tool, P Risk, was developed to detect these.
aimTo externally validate P Risk. DESIGN AND
settingThis retrospective cohort study used a validation dataset of 1 647 934 UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) primary care records linked to secondary care records.
methodThe same predictors (age; sex; ethnicity; social deprivation; consultations for suicidal behaviour, depression/anxiety, and substance misuse; history of consultations for suicidal behaviour; smoking history; substance misuse; prescribed medications for depression/anxiety/post-traumatic stress disorder/obsessive compulsive disorder; and total number of consultations) were used as for the development of P Risk. Predictive risk, sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios were calculated for various risk thresholds. Discrimination (Harrell's C-index) and calibration were calculated. Results were compared between the development (CPRD GOLD) and validation (CPRD Aurum) datasets.
resultsPsychosis risk increased with values of the P Risk prognostic index. Incidence was highest in younger age groups and, in the main, higher in males. Harrell's C was 0.79 (95% confidence interval = 0.78 to 0.79) in the validation dataset and 0.77 in the development dataset. A risk threshold of 1.0% gave sensitivity of 65.9% and specificity of 86.6%.
conclusionFurther testing is required, but P Risk has the potential to be used in primary care to detect future risk of 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.