J Klosterkötter1. 1. Klinik und Poliklinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Klinikum der Universität zu Köln, Kerpener Str. 62, 50924, Köln, Deutschland, joachim.klosterkoetter@uk-koeln.de.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The worldwide established early detection and prevention centers for psychosis follow the modern program of predictive, preventive and personalized medicine. OBJECTIVES: If primary prevention is to succeed, the individual risk of the disease has to be estimated correctly and the psychosis onset has to be accurately predicted. Accordingly, this article presents the current possibilities for prediction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An overview on the recent prediction analyses in clinical high risk for psychosis research is provided. RESULTS: The previously identified high-risk criteria achieve a considerable predictive power, which can be further enhanced by their combined use as well as other strategies of risk enrichment and risk stratification. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical prediction already allows risk-adapted prevention measures and is currently being enhanced even further by additional biological brain diagnostics.
BACKGROUND: The worldwide established early detection and prevention centers for psychosis follow the modern program of predictive, preventive and personalized medicine. OBJECTIVES: If primary prevention is to succeed, the individual risk of the disease has to be estimated correctly and the psychosis onset has to be accurately predicted. Accordingly, this article presents the current possibilities for prediction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An overview on the recent prediction analyses in clinical high risk for psychosis research is provided. RESULTS: The previously identified high-risk criteria achieve a considerable predictive power, which can be further enhanced by their combined use as well as other strategies of risk enrichment and risk stratification. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical prediction already allows risk-adapted prevention measures and is currently being enhanced even further by additional biological brain diagnostics.
Authors: Mitja Bodatsch; Stephan Ruhrmann; Michael Wagner; Ralf Müller; Frauke Schultze-Lutter; Ingo Frommann; Jürgen Brinkmeyer; Wolfgang Gaebel; Wolfgang Maier; Joachim Klosterkötter; Anke Brockhaus-Dumke Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2010-12-16 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Alison R Yung; Hok Pan Yuen; Patrick D McGorry; Lisa J Phillips; Daniel Kelly; Margaret Dell'Olio; Shona M Francey; Elizabeth M Cosgrave; Eoin Killackey; Carrie Stanford; Katherine Godfrey; Joe Buckby Journal: Aust N Z J Psychiatry Date: 2005 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 5.744
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
Authors: Frauke Schultze-Lutter; Stephan Ruhrmann; Julia Berning; Wolfgang Maier; Joachim Klosterkötter Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2008-06-25 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: Christos Pantelis; Dennis Velakoulis; Patrick D McGorry; Stephen J Wood; John Suckling; Lisa J Phillips; Alison R Yung; Edward T Bullmore; Warrick Brewer; Bridget Soulsby; Patricia Desmond; Philip K McGuire Journal: Lancet Date: 2003-01-25 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Dorien H Nieman; Stephan Ruhrmann; Sara Dragt; Francesca Soen; Mirjam J van Tricht; Johannes H T M Koelman; Lo J Bour; Eva Velthorst; Hiske E Becker; Mark Weiser; Don H Linszen; Lieuwe de Haan Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2013-10-18 Impact factor: 9.306