ArticleEarly intervention in psychiatry2025
Familial High-Risk for Psychosis and Bipolar Disorder Amongst Youth in an Academic Healthcare System: A Real-World Assessment of Clinical Characteristics and Implications for Clinical Care.
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 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.
- Family-Level Brain Pattern Similarities and Their Clinical Significance in Young Offspring of Individuals With Psychotic Disorders.Biological psychiatry. Cognitive neuroscience and neuroimaging · 2026Article
- Addressing Stress and Rhythm Dysregulation among Health Workers in the Post-Pandemic Context: An Italian Study and a Proposal for a Preventive Psychoeducational Intervention.Clinical practice and epidemiology in mental health : CP & EMH · 2026Article
- Higher levels of total cholesterol/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratios are associated with an increased risk of suicidal behavior in children and adolescents with depressive disorders.Frontiers 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveFamily history is amongst the most significant risk factors for psychotic and bipolar disorders. Despite being clearly defined, easily and early identifiable, familial high-risk status is minimally accounted for in mainstream prevention paradigms. This study reports on the demographics and clinical characteristics of youth with a first-degree relative affected by psychotic or bipolar disorders within a large academic healthcare system.
methodIn this quality improvement study, using electronic medical records, the authors examined demographics, psychiatric and medical diagnoses, substance use, service utilisation, and psychotropic medication use in children, adolescents and young adults (age 24 or younger) with and without a family history of psychotic or bipolar disorders within the Mass General Brigham (MGB) healthcare system.
resultsFamily history-positive (FHP) youth demonstrated markedly higher rates of psychiatric problems (57.8%) compared to family history-negative (FHN) youth (8.5%), including higher rates of psychotic and bipolar disorders, as well as anxiety disorders and depression. FHP youth also had more frequent psychotropic medication use and medical problems. Additionally, FHP youth reported higher cannabis and alcohol use, along with higher rates of suicidal ideation and trauma. Despite this, only 4% of FHP youth visited an MGB psychiatry or psychology department within the six months preceding the analysis.
conclusionFHP youth constitute a distinct and practically identifiable risk cohort within a large academic healthcare system. Increased psychiatric and medical problems coupled with more prevalent risk factors amongst familial high-risk youth highlight the need for tailored clinical programmes to achieve both primary and secondary prevention.
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.