ArticleJournal of psychiatric research2025
Persons at risk for psychosis overestimate social functioning compared to persons with major depressive disorder and community controls.
Article in Journal of psychiatric research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Subjective Perceptions of Digital Phenotyping Measures of Negative Symptoms Among Individuals At Clinical High Risk for Psychosis and Their Relatives.Schizophrenia bulletin open · 2026Article
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
Poor insight is common in persons with psychosis, but treatment can improve insight. Individuals with psychosis who exhibit better insight have better social functioning, reduced negative symptoms, and paradoxically worse depression. There is limited research investigating insight among persons at clinical high risk for psychosis (CHR). Understanding the relationship between insight, social functioning, negative symptoms, and depression might inform treatment. We focused on introspective bias (IB), the overestimation or underestimation of social functioning. Persons with CHR (N = 36), Major Depressive Disorder (MDD; N = 164), and community controls (N = 60) were recruited from the Multisite Assessment of Psychosis-risk Study and completed clinical interviews and self-report instruments. The estimation type was operationalized by whether a person was above or below the standardized mean difference between self-reported and interviewer-rated social functioning. We hypothesized that 1) persons at CHR would have less depressive symptom severity than those with MDD diagnoses, but more depressive symptom severity than control participants accounting for IB within diagnostic groups, 2) CHR and MDD participants would endorse higher levels of negative symptoms, viewed transdiagnostically (e.g., anhedonia, avolition), than controls but not each other, 3) overestimators would endorse higher levels of negative symptoms and depression than underestimators, 4) CHR participants would have the greatest proportions of overestimators, MDD would have the greatest proportion of underestimators, and control participants would have equal proportions of under- and overestimators. Those at CHR had more overestimators, overestimators overall had worse depression and negative symptoms, and diagnostic group membership did not impact the effects of IB on symptoms. This study suggests that IB has clinically relevant correlates but is not a primary treatment target for persons at CHR.
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.