ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Detection of psychosis risk: reliability and validity of the Spanish version of the Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental States interview (CAARMS-S).
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The early identification of psychosis risk is critical, particularly within the first 2 years of the at-risk phase, as timely intervention may reduce the likelihood of transitioning to psychosis. This study evaluates the reliability and validity of the Spanish version of the Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental States (CAARMS-S) interview. Methods: A prospective longitudinal study was conducted with 36 individuals at ultra-high risk (UHR), 43 with First-Episode Psychosis (FEP), and 14 matched controls, all of whom were part of the Early Intervention Program in Catalonia. Data collection involved clinical interviews and multiple validated scales, including the CAARMS-S, the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF), the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II Personality Disorders (SCID-II), and the Kiddie-Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia (K-SADS-PL). Results: Reliability testing showed excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's Discussion: These findings confirm that CAARMS-S is a reliable, valid, and sensitive tool for identifying and monitoring individuals at risk of psychosis in Spanish-speaking clinical settings, supporting its use in early intervention programs.
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.