Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39101211›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science2024

Development and initial evaluation of a clinical prediction model for risk of treatment resistance in first-episode psychosis: Schizophrenia Prediction of Resistance to Treatment (SPIRIT).

Saeed Farooq, Miriam Hattle, Tom Kingstone, Olesya Ajnakina, Paola Dazzan, Arsime Demjaha, Robin M Murray, Marta Di Forti, Peter B Jones, Gillian A Doody and 7 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Distinct structural deficits in treatment-resistant schizophrenia and their putative neurotransmitter basis: a source-based morphometry analysis.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

17 authors.

Saeed FarooqSchool of Medicine, Keele University, Newcastle-under-Lyme, UK; National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR), UK; and St George's Hospital, Midlands Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust, Stafford, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2088-6876
Miriam HattleInstitute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK; and National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, Birmingham, UK.
Tom KingstoneSchool of Medicine, Keele University, Newcastle-under-Lyme, UK; National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR), UK; and St George's Hospital, Midlands Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust, Stafford, UK.
Olesya AjnakinaDepartment of Biostatistics & Health Informatics, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK; and Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London, London, UK.
Paola DazzanDepartment of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Arsime DemjahaDepartment of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1870-6410
Robin M MurrayDepartment of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK; and Department of Psychiatry, Experimental Biomedicine and Clinical Neuroscience, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.
Marta Di FortiSocial, Genetic and Developmental Psychiatry Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3218-6925
Peter B JonesDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0387-880X
Gillian A DoodyDivision of Psychiatry and Applied Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
David ShiersSchool of Medicine, Keele University, Newcastle-under-Lyme, UK; Psychosis Research Unit, Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Trust, Manchester, UK; and University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Gabrielle AndrewsSt George's Hospital, Midlands Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust, Stafford, UK.
Abbie MilnerInstitute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK; and National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, Birmingham, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-5996-0706
Maria Antonietta NettisSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; and Department of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5401-8391
Andrew J LawrenceDepartment of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Danielle A van der WindtInstitute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK; and National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, Birmingham, UK.
Richard D RileyInstitute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK; and National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, Birmingham, UK.

Funding

Research for Patient Benefit Programme 200510
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA clinical tool to estimate the risk of treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) in people with first-episode psychosis (FEP) would inform early detection of TRS and overcome the delay of up to 5 years in starting TRS medication.

aimsTo develop and evaluate a model that could predict the risk of TRS in routine clinical practice.

methodWe used data from two UK-based FEP cohorts (GAP and AESOP-10) to develop and internally validate a prognostic model that supports identification of patients at high-risk of TRS soon after FEP diagnosis. Using sociodemographic and clinical predictors, a model for predicting risk of TRS was developed based on penalised logistic regression, with missing data handled using multiple imputation. Internal validation was undertaken via bootstrapping, obtaining optimism-adjusted estimates of the model's performance. Interviews and focus groups with clinicians were conducted to establish clinically relevant risk thresholds and understand the acceptability and perceived utility of the model.

resultsWe included seven factors in the prediction model that are predominantly assessed in clinical practice in patients with FEP. The model predicted treatment resistance among the 1081 patients with reasonable accuracy; the model's C-statistic was 0.727 (95% CI 0.723-0.732) prior to shrinkage and 0.687 after adjustment for optimism. Calibration was good (expected/observed ratio: 0.999; calibration-in-the-large: 0.000584) after adjustment for optimism.

conclusionsWe developed and internally validated a prediction model with reasonably good predictive metrics. Clinicians, patients and carers were involved in the development process. External validation of the tool is needed followed by co-design methodology to support implementation in early intervention services.

Indexed as

Psychotic DisordersSchizophreniaAdolescentAdultDrug ResistanceFemaleHumansMalePrognosisRisk AssessmentUnited KingdomYoung Adultdecision analysisFirst-episode schizophreniamixed methodsprognostic modeltreatment resistant

Identifiers

PMID39101211
PMCPMC11536189

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.