Defining subjects at risk for psychosis: A comparison of two approaches

Simon, Andor E.; Dvorsky, Diane; Boesch, Jakob; Roth, Binia; Isler, Emanuel; Schueler, Petra; Petralli, C; Umbricht, Daniel

doi:10.1016/j.schres.2005.10.006

Cited by 97 publications

(64 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…1 This approach has previously been used with basic symptoms with the effect of defining a more narrow and homogenous clinical group. 37 The accumulating literature regarding the significance of basic self-disturbance has implications for intervention in the UHR population. First, greater resources may be put into treatment of those who display the vulnerability factor of basic self-disturbance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Basic Self-Disturbance Predicts Psychosis Onset in the Ultra High Risk for Psychosis "Prodromal" Population

Nelson

Thompson²,

Yung³

2012

Schizophrenia Bulletin

242

151

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Basic Self-Disturbance Predicts Psychosis Onset in the Ultra High Risk for Psychosis "Prodromal" Population

Nelson

Thompson²,

Yung³

2012

Schizophrenia Bulletin

242

151

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The depression and negative symptom clusters are sometimes difficult to distinguish [6,9,12,13,14]. However, several reasons underline the importance of differentiating between these two clusters:…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factor Analysis of the Scale of Prodromal Symptoms: Differentiating between Negative and Depression Symptoms

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: This study examines the ability of the Scale of Prodromal Symptoms (SOPS) to differentiate between negative and depression symptoms in a young help-seeking ultrahigh risk (UHR) group. Methods: SOPS data of 77 help-seeking patients at UHR for psychosis were analyzed with an exploratory factor analysis. The extracted Depression factor was validated with the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). The extracted SOPS Negative symptoms factor was validated with the Negative symptoms subscale of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). Results: Four factors were extracted from the SOPS: a negative, depression, disorganized and positive factor. The Negative symptom factor consisted of three items (N1: social anhedonia and withdrawal, N3: decreased expression of emotion; N4: decreased experience of emotions and self), and could be validated with the PANSS Negative symptoms subscale. The Depression factor was also made up of three items (G2: dysphoric mood, G4: impaired tolerance to normal stress, and D4: personal hygiene/social attentiveness), and could be validated with the BDI. Conclusions: Our results suggest that 3 items of the Negative symptoms subscale of the SOPS, 2 items of the General and 1 item of the Disorganization subscale differentiate validly between negative and depression symptoms in an UHR population.

show abstract

“…Disturbances of cognition, speech, and perception predict the development of schizophrenia [12] . It has been shown that when the basic symptom approach (early prodromal phase) and the 'ultra high-risk' approach (late prodromal phase) are combined, a more narrow and homogeneous group can be defined [15] . Patients in the late prodromal stage show more pronounced neurocognitive impairments than in the early prodromal phase [16] .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Anomalous Subjective Experience and Psychosis Risk in Young Depressed Patients

Szily

Kéri

2009

Psychopathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Help-seeking young people often display depressive symptoms. In some patients, these symptoms may co-exist with clinically high-risk mental states for psychosis. The aim of this study was to determine differences in subjective experience and social perception in young depressed patients with and without psychosis risk. Methods: Participants were 68 young persons with major depressive disorder. Twenty-six patients also met the criteria of attenuated or brief limited intermittent psychotic symptoms according to the Comprehensive Assessment of At Risk Mental States (CAARMS) criteria. Subjective experiences were assessed with the Bonn Scale for the Assessment of Basic Symptoms (BSABS). Recognition of complex social emotions and mental states was assessed using the ‘Reading the Mind in the Eyes’ test. Results: Perplexity, self-disorder, and diminished affectivity significantly predicted psychosis risk. Depressed patients without psychosis risk displayed impaired recognition performance for negative social emotions, whereas patients with psychosis risk were also impaired in the recognition of cognitive expressions. In the high-risk group, self-disorder was associated with impaired recognition of facial expressions. Conclusions: These results suggest that anomalous subjective experience and impaired recognition of complex emotions may differentiate between young depressed patients with and without psychosis risk.

show abstract

Defining subjects at risk for psychosis: A comparison of two approaches

Cited by 97 publications

References 16 publications

Basic Self-Disturbance Predicts Psychosis Onset in the Ultra High Risk for Psychosis "Prodromal" Population

Basic Self-Disturbance Predicts Psychosis Onset in the Ultra High Risk for Psychosis "Prodromal" Population

Factor Analysis of the Scale of Prodromal Symptoms: Differentiating between Negative and Depression Symptoms

Anomalous Subjective Experience and Psychosis Risk in Young Depressed Patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About