ArticleSchizophrenia research2026
Phantom vibrations: An understudied marker of clinical risk for psychosis.
Article in Schizophrenia research, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionEarly identification of psychosis risk may lead to improved outcomes for those who go on to develop psychotic disorders. Despite significant advances in this domain, there remains a need for novel and valid markers of risk. In the present manuscript, we report on a novel candidate indicator of risk: phantom phone vibrations.
methodsWe administered a phantom vibrations questionnaire to 83 clinical high-risk individuals (CHR) and 76 healthy controls. The primary dependent variables of interest were lifetime occurrence, severity, and frequency of phantom vibrations. Convergent validity was assessed via the Launay Slade Hallucinations Scale (LSHS). In a subset of participants, we also estimated relationships between North American Prodrome Longitudinal Study (NAPLS) risk scores and phantom vibrations.
resultsWe found that the odds of experiencing phantom cell phone vibrations were 3 times higher for CHR compared to controls (b = 1.11, p = 0.003, OR = 3.03, 95% CI [1.48,6.51]). Furthermore, CHR reported greater frequency (b = 1.07, p = 0.001, OR = 2.92, 95% CI [1.52,5.69]) and bothersomeness of the phantom vibrations (b = 1.48, p < 0.001, OR = 4.39, 95% CI [2.09,9.62]). Greater severity of self-reported hallucinations (LSHS) and greater NAPLS risk scores were also associated with phantom vibration experiences.
conclusionOur results suggest that phantom cell phone vibrations are an understudied marker of clinical risk for psychosis. Future work should assess neural mechanisms and longitudinal predictive utility of these experiences.
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.