ArticleEarly intervention in psychiatry2025
Clinical high risk for psychosis and service disengagement: Incidence and predictors across 2 years of follow-up.
Article in Early intervention in psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychometric properties of the PANSS autism severity score (PAUSS) in young peoples at clinical high risk for psychosis: does it really measure autistic features?European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2026Article
- Exposure to Antipsychotics in Youths at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis: Low VS High Doses and Their Relevance for Clinical Outcomes.Early intervention in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Psychiatric Antecedents in Adolescents at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis: Insights from the "Parma At-Risk Mental States" Follow-up Program.Research on child and adolescent psychopathology · 2025Article
- Clinical high risk for psychosis and service disengagement: Incidence and predictors across 2 years of follow-up.Early intervention in psychiatry · 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
Abstract
backService disengagement is common in subjects at CHR-P (clinical high risk for psychosis), potentially worsening daily functioning and increasing the duration of untreated psychosis. That is why to identify baseline predictors of service disengagement could help better tailoring follow-up on every CHR-P individual.
aimsSince there are few studies on this topic, the goals of this examination were: (1) to calculate service disengagement rates in a CHR-P sample along 2-years of follow-up; and (2) to examine the most relevant predictive factors of disengagement at baseline.
methodsAll young CHR-P participants were enrolled within the 'Parma At-Risk Mental States' (PARMS) protocol. At entry, the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scale and the positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS) were completed. Cox regression analyses were used.
resultsHundred and eighty CHR-P subjects were recruited in this examination. During the follow-up, a 2-year service disengagement prevalence rate of 15% was observed. A statistically robust predictive factor of service disengagement was a lower prescription of antidepressant drug at entry. Other relevant baseline predictive factors were migrant status, higher GAF score, lower levels of anxious-depressive symptoms and a lower acceptance of psychosocial interventions. DISCUSSION: Baseline presence of anxious-depressive features in CHR-P individuals could favour engagement to specialized EIP services. However, implementing strategies to improve patients' motivation and involvement in care are needed.
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.