ArticleEarly intervention in psychiatry2025
Screening the Community for Individuals at Clinical High Risk (CHR) for Psychosis.
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 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.
- Negative symptoms and self-reflection increase alienation in individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis.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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe aim of our study was to assess the performance of the Prodromal Questionnaire-16 (PQ-16) and the Perceptual and Cognitive Aberrations scale (PCA) to screen for clinical high risk for psychosis (CHR) in a sample of nonhelp-seeking subjects from São Paulo, Brazil.
methodsIndividuals aged 18-35 years were interviewed with the PQ-16 and the PCA. Those with a combined score > 10 on the PQ-16 + PCA were called for assessment with the Structured Interview for Psychosis-Risk Syndromes (SIPS). Seventy-five individuals were deemed as CHR and 99 as healthy comparison; 44 randomly selected individuals (PQ-16 + PCA scores < 10) joined as further controls. All participants had no DSM-5 diagnosis. Scores of the PCA, PQ-16 (total score and distress index), and their combinations were analysed.
resultsAll the proposed scorings significantly distinguished between CHR and control subjects. Considering a 7% CHR prevalence in the population, PQ-16 score mathematically showed the best performance (AUC = 0.713), followed by the PQ-16 score + PCA (AUC = 0.701). PQ-16 distress had the worst performance (AUC = 0.642).
conclusionsData provides further evidence for the use of the PQ-16 score as an effective instrument to search for CHR states through active screening in the community. Future research should address its potential in helping CHR identification and thus reducing delays in care and minimising the risk of false positives.
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.