Commentary. Toward a core outcomes assessment set for clinical high risk

Preventive interventions for individuals at ultra high risk for psychosis: An updated and extended meta-analysis

“…For example, the significant improvement in positive psychotic symptoms identified at 12-months when all interventions were pooled was not maintained when pharmacological and psychological interventions were analyzed separately, although the effect sizes and confidence intervals were relatively comparable. The future creation of a core outcomes assessment set for UHR clinical trials would have the benefit of facilitating consistency in outcomes reported across trials (Woods, Mourgues-Codern, & Powers, 2021), which in turn may clarify the effect of specific interventions on non-transition outcomes.…”

A redux of schizophrenia research in 2021

“…Such patients who represent one in five real-world patients need to be represented in scientific studies for better ecological validity. Future science in schizophrenia should also focus on uniformity of assessment measures evaluating and reporting core outcomes ( Campana et al, 2021 ; Woods et al, 2021b ; Zipursky et al, 2020 ).…”

Prediction and Prevention in the Clinical High-Risk for Psychosis Paradigm: A Review of the Current Status and Recommendations for Future Directions of Inquiry

“…Another way to address outcome heterogeneity is to develop a core outcomes assessment set (COS) for clinical trials. The primary target of interventions would be expanded beyond psychosis transition to include change in positive, negative, anxiety, or depression symptoms, functioning, neurocognition, and recovery or remission (92). Determining a set of outcomes that were included in all trials would facilitate direct comparisons of interventions across trials (93).…”