CommentEvidence for preventive treatments in young patients at clinical high risk of psychosis: the need for context
References (10)
- et al.
What does the PANSS mean?
Schizophr Res
(2005) - et al.
Preventing a first episode of psychosis: meta-analysis of randomized controlled prevention trials of 12 month and longer-term follow-ups
Schizophr Res
(2013) - et al.
Antipsychotic drugs versus placebo for relapse prevention in schizophrenia: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Lancet
(2012) - et al.
Interventions for prodromal stage of psychosis
Cochrane Database Syst Rev
(2019) - et al.
Randomized controlled trial of interventions for young people at ultra-high risk of psychosis: twelve-month outcome
J Clin Psychiatry
(2013)
Cited by (12)
Early intervention service systems for youth mental health: integrating pluripotentiality, clinical staging, and transdiagnostic lessons from early psychosis
2022, The Lancet PsychiatryCitation Excerpt :Current ARMS criteria include the presence of mild (attenuated) psychotic symptoms, full threshold but brief (limited and intermittent) psychotic symptoms, or familial risk along with substantial functional deterioration.16,17 Despite debates regarding the effectiveness, relative risks, and benefits of specific treatments,14,18–20 interventions do delay and potentially prevent transition to a full psychotic disorder.21,22 ARMS services have now expanded across five continents,23 with neurobiological and clinical research proceeding apace.
Has improved treatment contributed to the declining rate of transition to psychosis in ultra-high-risk cohorts?
2022, Schizophrenia ResearchCitation Excerpt :This increased effectiveness of control/’treatment as usual’ conditions may have introduced a ceiling effect for finding additional benefit of specific trial interventions. It is also possible that the limitations of the statistical approach taken in these meta analyses (e.g., network meta analyses requiring a high number of head-to-head comparisons) may have contributed to their findings (Nelson et al., 2019; Nelson et al., 2018c). A number of limitations to the current study need to be recognised.
Preventive interventions for individuals at ultra high risk for psychosis: An updated and extended meta-analysis
2021, Clinical Psychology ReviewCitation Excerpt :Both treatments are well accepted and used globally. There is concern that the findings, and especially their interpretation, from recent network meta-analyses of non-superiority have created the perception that current interventions are not effective (McGorry et al., 2020; McGorry, Mei, Hartmann, Yung, & Nelson, 2021; McGorry & Nelson, 2020; Nelson et al., 2020; Nelson, Amminger, & McGorry, 2018; Nelson, Amminger, Thompson, et al., 2020). Although superiority over other therapeutic options has not been demonstrated via NMA, which is not unexpected, pairwise meta-analyses have shown clear benefits in favor of CBT.
Preventive treatments in patients at high risk of psychosis
2020, The Lancet PsychiatryThe exploration of a screen model for detecting undergraduates at higher risk for developing psychosis: A cross-sectional study in a medical university
2022, Perspectives in Psychiatric CareThe Role of Psychopharmacology in Mental Health Prevention
2022, Prevention in Mental Health: From Risk Management to Early Intervention