Recent studies have begun to look at gender differences in schizophrenia and first-episode psychosis in an attempt to explain the heterogeneity of the illness. However, a number of uncertainties remain. This paper tries to summarize the most important findings in gender differences in schizophrenia and first-psychosis episodes. Several studies indicate that the incidence of schizophrenia is higher in men. Most of the studies found the age of onset to be earlier in men than in women. Findings on symptoms are less conclusive, with some authors suggesting that men suffer more negative symptoms while women have more affective symptoms. Premorbid functioning and social functioning seem to be better in females than males. However, cognitive functioning remains an issue, with lack of consensus on differences in neuropsychological profile between women and men. Substance abuse is more common in men than women with schizophrenia and first-episode psychosis. In terms of the disease course, women have better remission and lower relapse rates. Lastly, there is no evidence of specific gender differences in familial risk and obstetric complications. Overall, gender differences have been found in a number of variables, and further study in this area could help provide useful information with a view to improving our care of these patients.

Objective:  To describe the development and validation of the Clinical Global Impression–Schizophrenia (CGI‐SCH) scale, designed to assess positive, negative, depressive and cognitive symptoms in schizophrenia. Method:  The CGI‐SCH scale was adapted from the CGI scale. Concurrent validity and sensitivity to change were assessed by comparison with the Positive and Negative Symptom Severity (PANSS) and Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scales. To evaluate inter‐rater reliability, all patients were assessed by two clinicians. Results:  Symptoms were assessed in 114 patients. Correlation coefficients between the CGI‐SCH and the GAF and PANSS scores were high (most above 0.75), and were highest for positive and negative symptoms. Reliability was substantial (intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC > 0.70) in all but one dimension (depressive dimension, ICC = 0.64). Conclusion:  The CGI‐SCH scale is a valid, reliable instrument to evaluate severity and treatment response in schizophrenia. Given its simplicity, brevity and clinical face validity, the scale is appropriate for use in observational studies and routine clinical practice.

IMPORTANCE Community-based surveys find that many otherwise healthy individuals report histories of hallucinations and delusions. To date, most studies have focused on the overall lifetime prevalence of any of these psychotic experiences (PEs), which might mask important features related to the types and frequencies of PEs.OBJECTIVE To explore detailed epidemiologic information about PEs in a large multinational sample. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSWe obtained data from the World Health Organization World Mental Health Surveys, a coordinated set of community epidemiologic surveys of the prevalence and correlates of mental disorders in representative household samples from 18 countries throughout the world, from 2001 through 2009. Respondents included 31 261 adults (18 years and older) who were asked about lifetime and 12-month prevalence and frequency of 6 types of PEs (2 hallucinatory experiences and 4 delusional experiences). We analyzed the data from March 2014 through January 2015.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Prevalence, frequency, and correlates of PEs.RESULTS Mean lifetime prevalence (SE) of ever having a PE was 5.8% (0.2%), with hallucinatory experiences (5.2% [0.2%]) much more common than delusional experiences (1.3% [0.1%]). More than two-thirds (72.0%) of respondents with lifetime PEs reported experiencing only 1 type. Psychotic experiences were typically infrequent, with 32.2% of respondents with lifetime PEs reporting only 1 occurrence and 31.8% reporting only 2 to 5 occurrences. We found a significant relationship between having more than 1 type of PE and having more frequent PE episodes (Cochran-Armitage z = −10.0; P < .001). Lifetime prevalence estimates (SEs) were significantly higher among respondents in middle-and high-income countries than among those in low-income countries (7.2% [0.4%], 6.8% [0.3%], and 3.2% [0.3%], respectively; χ 2 2 range, 7.1-58.2; P < .001 for each) and among women than among men (6.6% [0.2%] vs 5.0% [0.3%]; χ 2 1 = 16.0; P < .001). We found significant associations with lifetime prevalence of PEs in the multivariate model among nonmarried compared with married respondents (χ 2 2 = 23.2; P < .001) and among respondents who were not employed (χ 2 4 = 10.6; P < .001) and who had low family incomes (χ 2 3 = 16.9; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEThe epidemiologic features of PEs are more nuanced than previously thought. Research is needed that focuses on similarities and differences in the predictors of the onset, course, and consequences of distinct PEs.