Scott W Woods1, Barbara C Walsh2, Jean Addington3, Kristin S Cadenhead4, Tyrone D Cannon5, Barbara A Cornblatt6, Robert Heinssen7, Diana O Perkins8, Larry J Seidman9, Sarah I Tarbox2, Ming T Tsuang10, Elaine F Walker11, Thomas H McGlashan2. 1. Department of Psychiatry, Yale University, New Haven, CT, United States. Electronic address: scott.woods@yale.edu. 2. Department of Psychiatry, Yale University, New Haven, CT, United States. 3. Department of Psychiatry, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. 4. Department of Psychiatry, UCSD, San Diego, CA, United States. 5. Department of Psychology, Yale University, New Haven, CT, United States. 6. Department of Psychiatry, Zucker Hillside Hospital, Long Island, NY, United States. 7. Division of Services and Intervention Research, National Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, MD, United States. 8. Department of Psychiatry, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, United States. 9. Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States. 10. Department of Psychiatry, UCSD, San Diego, CA, United States; Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States. 11. Departments of Psychology and Psychiatry, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Longitudinal studies of the clinical high risk (CHR) syndrome for psychosis have emphasized the conversion vs non-conversion distinction and thus far have not focused intensively on classification among non-converters. The present study proposes a system for classifying CHR outcomes over time when using the Structured Interview for Psychosis-risk Syndromes and evaluates its validity. METHOD: The system for classifying CHR outcomes is referred to as "current status specifiers," with "current" meaning over the month prior to the present evaluation and "specifiers" indicating a set of labels and descriptions of the statuses. Specifiers for four current statuses are described: progression, persistence, partial remission, and full remission. Data from the North American Prodromal Longitudinal Study were employed to test convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity of the current status distinctions. RESULTS: Validity analyses partly supported current status distinctions. Social and role functioning were more impaired in progressive and persistent than in remitted patients, suggesting a degree of convergent validity. Agreement between CHR current statuses and current statuses for a different diagnostic construct (DSM-IV Major Depression) was poor, suggesting discriminant validity. The proportion converting to psychosis within a year was significantly higher in cases meeting progression criteria than in those meeting persistence criteria and tended to be higher than in those meeting full remission criteria, consistent with a degree of predictive validity. DISCUSSION: CHR syndrome current status specifiers could offer a potentially valid and useful description of current clinical status among non-converters. Study in additional samples is needed.
BACKGROUND: Longitudinal studies of the clinical high risk (CHR) syndrome for psychosis have emphasized the conversion vs non-conversion distinction and thus far have not focused intensively on classification among non-converters. The present study proposes a system for classifying CHR outcomes over time when using the Structured Interview for Psychosis-risk Syndromes and evaluates its validity. METHOD: The system for classifying CHR outcomes is referred to as "current status specifiers," with "current" meaning over the month prior to the present evaluation and "specifiers" indicating a set of labels and descriptions of the statuses. Specifiers for four current statuses are described: progression, persistence, partial remission, and full remission. Data from the North American Prodromal Longitudinal Study were employed to test convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity of the current status distinctions. RESULTS: Validity analyses partly supported current status distinctions. Social and role functioning were more impaired in progressive and persistent than in remitted patients, suggesting a degree of convergent validity. Agreement between CHR current statuses and current statuses for a different diagnostic construct (DSM-IV Major Depression) was poor, suggesting discriminant validity. The proportion converting to psychosis within a year was significantly higher in cases meeting progression criteria than in those meeting persistence criteria and tended to be higher than in those meeting full remission criteria, consistent with a degree of predictive validity. DISCUSSION: CHR syndrome current status specifiers could offer a potentially valid and useful description of current clinical status among non-converters. Study in additional samples is needed.
Authors: Jean Addington; Barbara A Cornblatt; Kristin S Cadenhead; Tyrone D Cannon; Thomas H McGlashan; Diana O Perkins; Larry J Seidman; Ming T Tsuang; Elaine F Walker; Scott W Woods; Robert Heinssen Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2011-04-15 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Danielle A Schlosser; Sarah Jacobson; Qiaolin Chen; Catherine A Sugar; Tara A Niendam; Gang Li; Carrie E Bearden; Tyrone D Cannon Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2011-08-08 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: Paolo Fusar-Poli; Ilaria Bonoldi; Alison R Yung; Stefan Borgwardt; Matthew J Kempton; Lucia Valmaggia; Francesco Barale; Edgardo Caverzasi; Philip McGuire Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 2012-03
Authors: Raimo K R Salokangas; Stephan Ruhrmann; Heinrich Graf von Reventlow; Markus Heinimaa; Tanja Svirskis; Tiina From; Sinikka Luutonen; Georg Juckel; Don Linszen; Peter Dingemans; Max Birchwood; Paul Patterson; Frauke Schultze-Lutter; Joachim Klosterkötter Journal: Schizophr Res Date: 2012-03-31 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: E Velthorst; D H Nieman; R M C Klaassen; H E Becker; P M Dingemans; D H Linszen; L De Haan Journal: Acta Psychiatr Scand Date: 2010-08-15 Impact factor: 6.392
Authors: Jadon R Webb; Jean Addington; Diana O Perkins; Carrie E Bearden; Kristin S Cadenhead; Tyrone D Cannon; Barbara A Cornblatt; Robert K Heinssen; Larry J Seidman; Sarah I Tarbox; Ming T Tsuang; Elaine F Walker; Thomas H McGlashan; Scott W Woods Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: T H Zhang; H J Li; K A Woodberry; L H Xu; Y Y Tang; Q Guo; H R Cui; X H Liu; A Chow; C B Li; K D Jiang; Z P Xiao; L J Seidman; J J Wang Journal: Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci Date: 2016-04-08 Impact factor: 6.892
Authors: Scott W Woods; Albert R Powers; Jerome H Taylor; Charlie A Davidson; Jason K Johannesen; Jean Addington; Diana O Perkins; Carrie E Bearden; Kristin S Cadenhead; Tyrone D Cannon; Barbara A Cornblatt; Larry J Seidman; Ming T Tsuang; Elaine F Walker; Thomas H McGlashan Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2018-02-15 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: Jean Addington; Danijela Piskulic; Lu Liu; Jonathan Lockwood; Kristin S Cadenhead; Tyrone D Cannon; Barbara A Cornblatt; Thomas H McGlashan; Diana O Perkins; Larry J Seidman; Ming T Tsuang; Elaine F Walker; Carrie E Bearden; Daniel H Mathalon; Scott W Woods Journal: Schizophr Res Date: 2017-03-31 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Anthony W Zoghbi; Joel A Bernanke; Julia Gleichman; Michael D Masucci; Cheryl M Corcoran; Allegra Califano; Justin Segovia; Tiziano Colibazzi; Michael B First; Gary Brucato; Ragy R Girgis Journal: J Psychiatr Res Date: 2019-04-21 Impact factor: 4.791
Authors: Eva Velthorst; Eric C Meyer; Anthony J Giuliano; Jean Addington; Kristin S Cadenhead; Tyrone D Cannon; Barbara A Cornblatt; Thomas H McGlashan; Diana O Perkins; Ming T Tsuang; Elaine F Walker; Scott W Woods; Carrie E Bearden; Larry J Seidman Journal: Schizophr Res Date: 2018-08-02 Impact factor: 4.939