BACKGROUND: The Edinburgh High-Risk Study is designed to explore the underlying pathogenesis of schizophrenia. AIMS: To establish the sample characteristics of the first 100 subjects in this study of young adults at risk of schizophrenia for genetic reasons, and to compare them with appropriate controls. METHOD: Details of the recruitment of the first 100 high-risk subjects aged 16-25 years into a prospective Scotland-wide study are given. Subjects and 30 age- and gender-matched normal controls were interviewed using the PSE, SADS-L and SIS and an unstructured psychiatric interview. RESULTS: Some significant differences emerged between the high-risk group and the control group, namely in previous psychiatric history (31 v. 6.3%), forensic contacts (19 v. 3.1%) and delinquent behaviour (20 v. 3.1%). There were also differences in some parameters from the SIS: childhood social isolation, interpersonal sensitivity, social isolation, suicidal ideation, restricted affect, oddness and disordered speech. CONCLUSIONS: These differences may represent increased risk of developing schizophrenia although their true significance will not be revealed until the cohort has been followed through the at-risk years.
BACKGROUND: The Edinburgh High-Risk Study is designed to explore the underlying pathogenesis of schizophrenia. AIMS: To establish the sample characteristics of the first 100 subjects in this study of young adults at risk of schizophrenia for genetic reasons, and to compare them with appropriate controls. METHOD: Details of the recruitment of the first 100 high-risk subjects aged 16-25 years into a prospective Scotland-wide study are given. Subjects and 30 age- and gender-matched normal controls were interviewed using the PSE, SADS-L and SIS and an unstructured psychiatric interview. RESULTS: Some significant differences emerged between the high-risk group and the control group, namely in previous psychiatric history (31 v. 6.3%), forensic contacts (19 v. 3.1%) and delinquent behaviour (20 v. 3.1%). There were also differences in some parameters from the SIS: childhood social isolation, interpersonal sensitivity, social isolation, suicidal ideation, restricted affect, oddness and disordered speech. CONCLUSIONS: These differences may represent increased risk of developing schizophrenia although their true significance will not be revealed until the cohort has been followed through the at-risk years.
Authors: Warrick J Brewer; Stephen J Wood; Lisa J Phillips; Shona M Francey; Christos Pantelis; Alison R Yung; Barbara Cornblatt; Patrick D McGorry Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2006-06-16 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: Heather C Whalley; Martina Papmeyer; Liana Romaniuk; Emma Sprooten; Eve C Johnstone; Jeremy Hall; Stephen M Lawrie; Kathryn L Evans; Hilary P Blumberg; Jessika E Sussmann; Andrew M McIntosh Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2012-08-01 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Killian A Welch; Andrew M McIntosh; Dominic E Job; Heather C Whalley; Thomas W Moorhead; Jeremy Hall; David G C Owens; Stephen M Lawrie; Eve C Johnstone Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2010-03-11 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: Heather C Whalley; Viktoria-Eleni Gountouna; Jeremy Hall; Andrew McIntosh; Marie-Claire Whyte; Enrico Simonotto; Dominic E Job; David G C Owens; Eve C Johnstone; Stephen M Lawrie Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2007-10-29 Impact factor: 3.630
Authors: Charlotte Gayer-Anderson; Helen L Fisher; Paul Fearon; Gerard Hutchinson; Kevin Morgan; Paola Dazzan; Jane Boydell; Gillian A Doody; Peter B Jones; Robin M Murray; Thomas K Craig; Craig Morgan Journal: Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol Date: 2015-04-18 Impact factor: 4.519