ArticleSocial psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology2025
The victimisation experience schedule: contextualising interpersonal trauma and perceived discrimination in individuals with psychotic experiences with and without a need-for-care.
Article in Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
purposeVictimisation is associated with psychotic experiences (PEs) across the psychosis continuum, yet contextual factors possibly influencing outcomes have been neglected. Building on the Unusual Experiences Enquiry study (UNIQUE) showing higher childhood trauma but lower discrimination in individuals with PEs without a need-for-care, compared to those with a need-for-care, this study utilized a novel instrument to examine victimisation-related contextual factors.
methodsIndividuals from the UNIQUE study with persistent PEs with (clinical, n = 82) and without (non-clinical, n = 92) a need-for-care, and a control group without PEs (n = 83), completed the Victimisation Experiences Schedule (VES). This multidimensional instrument, comprising items from validated measures, assesses interpersonal traumas and discriminatory experiences, alongside contextual factors: impact, powerlessness, social support, age, duration, frequency, victim-perpetrator relationships, and reasons for discrimination.
resultsThere were no differences in lifetime interpersonal traumas between the clinical and non-clinical groups, with the latter reporting slightly more than controls. The clinical group experienced more lifetime perceived discrimination than the other groups. No differences emerged in impact and powerlessness at the time of victimisation; however, the clinical group reported lower positive social support and higher current impact and powerlessness for both types of victimisation. Discrimination occurred earlier and lasted longer in the clinical group than the other groups, often attributed to mental health and race/ethnicity, likely reflecting a higher proportion of racially minoritized individuals.
conclusionThe results suggest an interplay between risk and protective factors around victimisation that may shape outcomes, highlighting the importance of assessing contextual factors of victimisation using comprehensive tools like the VES.
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.