Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40762913›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2025

Incidence, Prevalence, and Stability of Remission in Individuals With Clinical High Risk for Psychosis.

Johanna Seitz-Holland, Grace R Jacobs, Jenna Reinen, Daniel Mathalon, Cheryl Corcoran, Abraham Reichenberg, Mark Vangel, Robert J Glynn, Nora Penzel, Kang-Ik K Cho and 14 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

24 authors.

Johanna Seitz-HollandDepartment of Psychiatry, Mass General Brigham, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Grace R JacobsDepartment of Psychiatry, Mass General Brigham, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Jenna ReinenIBM Research, T.J. Watson Research Laboratory, Yorktown Heights, New York.
Daniel MathalonDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of California, San Francisco.
Cheryl CorcoranDepartment of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York.
Abraham ReichenbergDepartment of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York.
Mark VangelDepartment of Psychiatry, Mass General Brigham, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Robert J GlynnDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Nora PenzelDepartment of Psychiatry, Mass General Brigham, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Kang-Ik K ChoDepartment of Psychiatry, Mass General Brigham, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Eduardo CastroIBM Research, T.J. Watson Research Laboratory, Yorktown Heights, New York.
Anastasia HaidarDepartment of Psychiatry, Mass General Brigham, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Jean M AddingtonDepartment of Psychiatry, Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Tina KapurDepartment of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Sylvain BouixDepartment of Psychiatry, Mass General Brigham, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Carrie E BeardenDepartments of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences and Psychology, Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior, University of California, Los Angeles.
John M KaneDepartment of Psychiatry, Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Hempstead, New York.
Patrick D McGorryOrygen, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Scott W WoodsDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Barnaby NelsonOrygen, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
René S KahnDepartment of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York.
Martha E ShentonDepartment of Psychiatry, Mass General Brigham, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Guillermo A CecchiIBM Research, T.J. Watson Research Laboratory, Yorktown Heights, New York.
Ofer PasternakDepartment of Psychiatry, Mass General Brigham, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: While remission from clinical high risk (CHR) for psychosis is a favorable outcome, it is not well characterized over time. Objective: To examine remission incidence, prevalence, and stability, and their association with demographic, clinical, medication, and cognitive variables, comparing 2 commonly used definitions. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study examined data from individuals aged 12 to 30 years at CHR in the North American Prodromal Longitudinal Study 3, collected from 9 sites across the US from February 2015 to November 2018. Statistical analyses were conducted between January 2023 and May 2025. Exposure: CHR status using 2 definitions: (1) a symptoms-only definition based on the positive symptoms from the Scale of Prodromal Symptoms and (2) a symptoms-and-function definition based on positive symptoms and the modified Global Assessment of Functioning. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were remission incidence, prevalence, and stability for 7 follow-up visits over 2 years. Associations of remission with age, sex at birth, race, antipsychotic and antidepressant medication, history of trauma, and cognitive performance were determined using mixed-effects logistic regression. Results: The sample included 692 individuals (mean [SD] age, 18.7 [4.1] years; 319 female [46%]) at baseline, with 614 completing at least 1 follow-up. For the symptoms-only definition, 7% (95% CI, 5%-10%) met remission criteria after 2 months, 34% (95% CI, 31%-38%) met remission criteria at least once during the study, and 26% (95% CI, 22%-29%) met criteria at their last visit. The symptoms-and-function definition was associated with a lower remission incidence and prevalence, with 4% (95%CI, 2%-5%) meeting remission criteria after 2 months, 21% (95% CI, 18%-24%) meeting criteria at least once, and 15% (95% CI, 13%-18%) meeting criteria at their last visit. Under the symptoms-only definition, 83 of 153 individuals at CHR with at least 1 follow-up after remission (54%; 95% CI, 46%-62%) were stable remitters. Under the symptoms-and-function definition, 43 of 91 individuals (47%; 95% CI, 37%-58%) were stable remitters. The chance of staying in remission rose drastically once a person had more than 1 previous recorded remission visit. Higher functioning was associated with higher likelihood of remission (current score for symptoms only: OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.08; current score for symptoms and function: OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.02-1.14). More symptoms at baseline was associated with a lower likelihood of remission (general symptoms for symptoms only: OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.70-0.84; general symptoms for symptoms and function: OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.69-0.92). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that CHR status is a dynamic state and that vulnerability can persist even after functional remission. Hence, continued follow-up and facilitated reengagement with clinical services after remission are essential.

Indexed as

Prodromal SymptomsPsychotic DisordersAdolescentAdultAntipsychotic AgentsChildFemaleHumansIncidenceLongitudinal StudiesMalePrevalenceRemission InductionRisk FactorsUnited StatesYoung AdultAntipsychotic Agents

Identifiers

PMID40762913
PMCPMC12326281

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.