ArticleSchizophrenia bulletin open2026
Co-Design of a Novel Desirability of Outcome Ranking for Medication Trials in Psychosis.
Article in Schizophrenia bulletin open, 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Clinical trials of medication for psychosis focus on symptom reduction or relapse as the primary outcome. Broader consumer definitions of recovery that emphasize quality of life, functioning, and treatment tolerability are rarely incorporated into primary trial outcomes. The aim was to co-design a Desirability of Outcome Ranking (DOOR), a novel primary outcome that integrates multiple consumer and clinician priorities in relation to antipsychotic medication trials. Study Design: Through an iterative co-design process, clinicians and consumers (young people and families with lived experience of psychosis) first rated outcomes of greatest personal and clinical importance for medication trials. The top three were quality of life, clinical symptoms, and side effects. Consumers then completed a preliminary survey, co-design focus groups, and written feedback to create the DOOR. Study Results: A final DOOR with 48 ordinal levels was created. Consumers prioritized quality of life, but only when symptoms and/or side effects remained within tolerable (mild-moderate) ranges. Levels 1-12 represented the most desirable outcomes, characterized by high/moderate quality of life with minimal-to-mild symptoms/side effects. Levels 13-24 reflected moderate/high quality of life with a mixture of symptom/side-effect outcomes. Levels 25-36 reflected low/moderate quality of life with generally lower symptoms/side effects. Levels 37-48 were least desirable, characterized by low/moderate quality of life with generally moderate/severe symptoms/side effects. Conclusions: This co-designed novel DOOR integrates multiple consumer and clinician preferred constructs into a single holistic outcome. Examining its performance and interpretability in clinical trials of medication for psychosis is warranted.
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.