ArticlePsychological medicine2025
Predicting experiences of paranoia and auditory verbal hallucinations in daily life with ambulatory sensor data - A feasibility study.
Article in Psychological medicine, 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.
- From neuroinflammation to neural inference: computational psychiatry meets precision medicine.Schizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrediction models that can detect the onset of psychotic experiences are a key component of developing Just-In-Time Adaptive Interventions (JITAI). Building these models on passively collectable data could substantially reduce user burden. In this study, we developed prediction models to detect experiences of auditory verbal hallucinations (AVH) and paranoia using ambulatory sensor data and assessed their stability over 12 weeks.
methodsFourteen individuals diagnosed with a schizophrenia-spectrum disorder participated in a 12-day Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) study. They wore ambulatory sensors measuring autonomic arousal (i.e., electrodermal activity, heart rate variability) and completed questionnaires assessing the intensity/distress of AVHs and paranoia once every hour. After 12 weeks, participants repeated the EMA for four days for a follow-up assessment. We calculated prediction models to detect AVHs, paranoia, and AVH-/paranoia-related distress using random forests within nested cross-validation. Calculated prediction models were applied to the follow-up data to assess the stability of prediction models.
resultsPrediction models calculated with physiological data achieved high accuracy both for AVH (81%) and paranoia (69%-75%). Accuracy increased by providing models with baseline information about psychotic symptom levels (AVH: 86%; paranoia: 80%-85%). During the follow-up EMA accuracy dropped slightly throughout all models but remained high (73%-84%).
conclusionsRelying solely on physiological data to detect psychotic symptoms achieved substantial accuracy that remained sufficiently stable over 12 weeks. Experiences of AVHs can be predicted with higher accuracy and long-term stability than paranoia. The findings tentatively suggest that psychophysiology-based prediction models could be used to develop and enhance JITAIs for 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.