Literature DB >> 21545689

Differential results between self-report and interview-based ratings of risk symptoms of psychosis.

Niklas Granö1, Marjaana Karjalainen, Arja Itkonen, Jukka Anto, Virve Edlund, Markus Heinimaa, Mikko Roine.   

Abstract

AIM: Assessing potential risk of developing psychosis has gained growing attention in recent literature. The selection of suitable assessment methods is the central question for this research endeavour. Whereas prodromal detection instruments are mostly interview-based instruments, there are short screening instruments for self-report use.
METHODS: Difference in psychosis risk scores was tested between self-report results and interview results, with risk symptoms of psychosis included in PROD screening instrument. Subjects were recruited by an early intervention team in Finland.
RESULTS: There was a significant difference between psychosis risk scores based on self-report versus interview in a sample of adolescents (n=87; P<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that when using screening instruments, risk scores and risk status may vary by the method the information is collected. Checking self-report results by an additional interview is recommended for both clinical and scientific uses.
© 2011 Blackwell Publishing Asia Pty Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21545689     DOI: 10.1111/j.1751-7893.2011.00266.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Early Interv Psychiatry        ISSN: 1751-7885            Impact factor:   2.732


  5 in total

1.  Actigraphic-measured sleep disturbance predicts increased positive symptoms in adolescents at ultra high-risk for psychosis: A longitudinal study.

Authors:  Jessica R Lunsford-Avery; Monique K LeBourgeois; Tina Gupta; Vijay A Mittal
Journal:  Schizophr Res       Date:  2015-03-26       Impact factor: 4.939

Review 2.  Chances and risks of predicting psychosis.

Authors:  Stephan Ruhrmann; Joachim Klosterkötter; Mitja Bodatsch; Alexandra Nikolaides; Dominika Julkowski; Desire Hilboll; Frauke Schultz-Lutter
Journal:  Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci       Date:  2012-08-30       Impact factor: 5.270

Review 3.  The psychosis high-risk state: a comprehensive state-of-the-art review.

Authors:  Paolo Fusar-Poli; Stefan Borgwardt; Andreas Bechdolf; Jean Addington; Anita Riecher-Rössler; Frauke Schultze-Lutter; Matcheri Keshavan; Stephen Wood; Stephan Ruhrmann; Larry J Seidman; Lucia Valmaggia; Tyrone Cannon; Eva Velthorst; Lieuwe De Haan; Barbara Cornblatt; Ilaria Bonoldi; Max Birchwood; Thomas McGlashan; William Carpenter; Patrick McGorry; Joachim Klosterkötter; Philip McGuire; Alison Yung
Journal:  JAMA Psychiatry       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 21.596

4.  Assessing psychotic-like symptoms using the BASC-2: adolescent, parent and teacher agreement.

Authors:  Katie L Nugent; Emily Kline; Elizabeth Thompson; Gloria Reeves; Jason Schiffman
Journal:  Early Interv Psychiatry       Date:  2013-01-24       Impact factor: 2.732

5.  Community Psychosis Risk Screening: An Instrument Development Investigation.

Authors:  Lauren M Ellman; Jason Schiffman; Vijay A Mittal
Journal:  J Psychiatr Brain Sci       Date:  2020-08-20
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.