No abstract

No abstract

Background Characterizing the link between childhood trauma and adult neurocognitive function in psychosis is crucial for improving the fields understanding of how early environmental risk factors impact the presentation of the disorder. To date, the literature has been inconsistent: meta-analytic synthesis is lacking, and it is unclear whether specific cognitive functions are affected. Methods A meta-analysis was performed on a total of 3315 subjects with a psychotic disorder. The links between childhood trauma, overall neurocognitive function, and four cognitive subdomains (working memory, executive function, verbal/visual memory, and attention/processing speed) were examined. Relevant sample characteristics and methodological moderators were tested. The strength of the association between trauma and overall neurocognition in individuals with psychotic disorders was also compared to that of healthy controls. Results Among individuals with psychotic disorders, there was a significant association between overall cognition and childhood trauma, r = −.055; 95% CI = −0.09, −0.02, P = .002. There was also a modest, negative relationship between childhood trauma and working memory, r = −.091; 95% CI = −0.15, −0.03, P = .002. Moderators did not have a significant effect on these analyses. Further, the association between childhood trauma and neurocognition was significantly stronger in healthy controls compared to patients with a psychotic disorder. Conclusion A small negative association was found between overall cognition and childhood trauma in individuals with psychotic disorders. Results suggest the association is less strong for individuals with a psychotic disorder compared to healthy populations. Findings are informative for prominent etiological models of psychosis.

Background and AimsOpioid overdose is a public health emergency in the United States. In an attempt to reduce potentially inappropriate opioid prescribing, many US states have adopted legal restrictions on the ability of medical professionals to prescribe or dispense opioids for pain. This review describes the major elements of relevant US state laws and the ways in which they have changed over time. Methods Systematic legal review in which two trained legal researchers collected and reviewed all US state laws that limit the amount or duration of opioids that medical professionals may prescribe or dispense for pain. These laws were then coded on a set of pre-selected measures, including when the law was enacted, dosage and duration limits imposed, circumstances in which the restrictions do not apply and whether additional requirements or restrictions apply to prescriptions issued to minors. Results The number of US states with opioid limitation laws increased from 10 in 2016 to 39 by the end of 2019. The provisions of these laws vary between states and have shifted within states over time. At the end of 2019 the modal duration limit was 7 days, with a range of 3 to 31. Fourteen states imposed limits on the dosage of opioids that can be prescribed, ranging from 30 morphine milligram equivalents (MME) to a 120 MME daily maximum. In 16 states, different limits apply to prescriptions issued to minors. ConclusionsThe number of US states with opioid limitation laws nearly quadrupled between 2016 and 2019, with a great amount of heterogeneity between state restrictions and changes over time.

No abstract