Experiencing psychological trauma during childhood and/or adolescence is associated with an increased risk of psychosis in adulthood. However, we lack a clear knowledge of how developmental trauma induces vulnerability to psychotic symptoms. Understanding the psychological processes involved in this association is crucial to the development of preventive interventions and improved treatments. We sought to systematically review the literature and combine findings using meta‐analytic techniques to establish the potential roles of psychological processes in the associations between developmental trauma and specific psychotic experiences (i.e., hallucinations, delusions and paranoia). Twenty‐two studies met our inclusion criteria. We found mediating roles of dissociation, emotional dysregulation and post‐traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms (avoidance, numbing and hyperarousal) between developmental trauma and hallucinations. There was also evidence of a mediating role of negative schemata, i.e. mental constructs of meanings, between developmental trauma and delusions as well as paranoia. Many studies to date have been of poor quality, and the field is limited by mostly cross‐sectional research. Our findings suggest that there may be distinct psy­chological pathways from developmental trauma to psychotic phenomena in adulthood. Clinicians should carefully ask people with psychosis about their history of developmental trauma, and screen patients with such a history for dissociation, emotional dysregulation and PTSD symptoms. Well conducted research with prospective designs, including neurocognitive assessment, is required in order to fully understand the biopsychosocial mechanisms underlying the association between developmental trauma and psychosis.

SummaryBackgroundSevere mental illness is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The elevated risk of blood-borne viruses (BBVs) in people with severe mental illness is of concern, but the full extent of this problem is unclear. We aimed to determine the prevalence of and risk factors for BBVs in people with severe mental illness.MethodsIn this nationwide, population-based, cross-sectional study, we estimated the point prevalence of HIV, hepatitis B (HBV), and hepatitis C (HCV) in people with severe mental illness, including the total adult (≥18 years) Swedish population. We defined severe mental illness as a clinical diagnosis of schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar disorder, or other psychotic illness according to the Swedish version of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases version 8, 9, or 10. We used multivariable logistic regression to determine the odds of BBVs in individuals with severe mental illness, relative to the general population, and to identify independent risk factors (age, sex, immigration status, socioeconomic status, education, and substance misuse) for BBV infection. We also did a sensitivity analysis excluding BBV diagnoses made before the introduction of the Register for Infection Disease Control (1997).FindingsOf 6 815 931 adults in Sweden, 97 797 (1·43%) individuals had a diagnosis of severe mental illness. Prevalence of BBVs was elevated in people with severe mental illness, of which 230 (0·24%) had HIV, 518 (0·53%) had HBV, and 4476 (4·58%) had HCV. After accounting for sociodemographic characteristics, the odds of HIV were 2·57 (95% CI 2·25–2·94, p<0·0001) times higher in people with severe mental illness than in the general population, whereas the odds of HBV were 2·29 (2·09–2·51, p<0·0001) times higher and the odds of HCV were 6·18 (5·98–6·39, p<0·0001) times higher. Substance misuse contributed most to the increased risk of BBV: after adjustment, odds ratios were 1·61 (1·40–1·85, p<0·0001) for HIV, 1·28 (1·16–1·41, p<0·0001) for HBV, and 1·72 (1·67–1·78, p<0·0001) for HCV.InterpretationOur results highlight the need to address the issue of higher prevalence of BBVs in people with severe mental illness and identify interventions preventing infection. Targeting of comorbid substance misuse would have particular effect on reduction of BBV prevalence in this population.FundingMedical Research Council and Swedish Research Council.

Objective: Previous research on the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for depression and anxiety is based on population averages. The present study aimed to identify the MCID across the spectrum of baseline severity.Study Design and Settings: The present analysis used secondary data from 2 randomized controlled trials for depression ( n = 1,122) to calibrate the Global Rating of Change with the PHQ-9 and GAD-7. The MCID was defined as a change in scores corresponding to a 50% probability of patients "feeling better", given their baseline severity, referred to as Effective Dose 50 (ED50).Results: MCID estimates depended on baseline severity and ranged from no change for very mild up to 14 points (52%) on the PHQ-9 and up to 10 points (48%) on the GAD-7 for very high severity. The average MCID estimates were 3.7 points (23%) and 3.3 (28%) for the PHQ-9 and GAD-7 respectively. Conclusion:The ED50 method generates MCID estimates across the spectrum of baseline severity, offering greater precision but at the cost of greater complexity relative to population average estimates. This has important implications for evaluations of treatments and clinical practice where users can use these results to tailor the MCID to specific populations according to baseline severities.