These findings are cross sectional and do not infer causality. Nonetheless, they indicate that associations between one type of childhood adversity (i.e. neglect) and social cognition are present and are not illness-specific.
Studies assessing the treatment outcomes in first-episode schizophrenia have reported mixed results. While symptom improvement is frequently robust, when other domains are considered outcomes are generally poorer. We explored response trajectories, rates and predictors of recovery in the domains of core psychopathology, clinician-rated social and occupational functioning and patient-rated quality of life over 24 months of treatment in 98 patients with first-episode schizophrenia spectrum disorders who were treated with a long-acting antipsychotic medication. There was robust improvement in core psychopathology (effect size d = 3.36) and functionality (d = 1.78), with most improvement occurring within the first six months of treatment. In contrast, improvement in subjective quality of life was less marked (d = 0.37) and slower, only reaching significance after 12 months of treatment. Symptom remission was achieved by 70% of patients and over half met our criteria for functional remission and good quality of life. However, only 29% met the full criteria for recovery. Patients who met the recovery criteria had better premorbid adjustment, were less likely to be of mixed ethnicity and substance use emerged as the only modifiable predictor of recovery. Only 9% of our sample achieved both functional remission and good quality of life despite not being in symptom remission. We found high rates of symptom remission, functional remission and good quality of life in patients, although relatively few achieved recovery by meeting all three of the outcome criteria. Symptom remission is not a necessary prerequisite for functional remission and good quality of life, although few non-remitters achieve other recovery criteria.npj Schizophrenia (2020) 6:2 ; https://doi.
BackgroundThis research aimed to identify and explore the experiences of Black registrars in their training in the Western Cape’s academic hospitals in order to identify structures, practices, attitudes and ideologies that may promote or impede the advancement of Black doctors into specialist medicine. This is justified by the requirement for universities to work towards monitoring and evaluating efforts to create non-discriminatory and inclusive training environments.MethodsThis study employed qualitative research methods. Ten Black African medical specialists were interviewed about their training experiences in two university training hospitals in the Western Cape Province, South Africa. Interview data was collected using open-ended questions and coded and analysed using thematic and critical discursive analysis techniques.ResultsFour experiential themes emerged from the interview data, they included: 1) experiences of everyday racism during work hours, 2) the physical and psychological effects of tokenism and an increased need to perform, 3) institutional racism as a result of inconsistent and unclear methods of promotion and clinical competence building, and 4) an organisational culture that was experienced as having a race and gender bias.ConclusionThis is a pilot study and there are limits on the generalizability of the data due to the small sample. What is clear from our participants, though, is the strong experiential component of finding it challenging to be a Black trainee in a White-dominated profession. We are undertaking further research to explore the issues raised in more detail.
Brain volume reductions associated with antipsychotic treatment are not restricted to poor outcome patients and occur even with the lowest effective dose of antipsychotic. The lack of an association with poor treatment response or treatment-related adverse effects counts against cortical volume reductions reflecting neurotoxicity, at least in the short term. On the other hand, the volume reductions were not linked to the therapeutic benefits of antipsychotics.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.