Cited by 151Schizophrenia research and treatmentBipolar Disorder and TreatmentPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending

Prognosis of Brief Psychotic Episodes: A Meta-analysis

Open access
Fusar-Poli, Paolo, Cappucciati, Marco, Bonoldi, Ilaria, Hui, L. M. Christy, Rutigliano, Grazia, Stahl, Daniel R., Borgwardt, Stefan, Politi, Pierluigi +4 more·2016·JAMA Psychiatry

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: The prognostic significance of competing constructs and operationalizations for brief psychotic episodes (acute and transient psychotic disorder [ATPD], brief psychotic disorder [BPD], brief intermittent psychotic symptoms [BIPS], and brief limited intermittent psychotic symptoms [BLIPS]) is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To provide a meta-analytical prognosis of the risk of psychotic recurrence in patients with remitted first-episode ATPD, BPD, BIPS, and BLIPS and in a benchmark group of patients with remitted first-episode schizophrenia (FES). We hypothesized a differential risk: FES > ATPD > BPD > BIPS > BLIPS. DATA SOURCES: The Web of Knowledge and Scopus databases were searched up to May 18, 2015; the articles identified were reviewed as well as citations of previous publications and results of a manual search of the reference lists of retrieved articles. STUDY SELECTION: We included original articles that reported the risk of psychotic recurrence at follow-up for patients in remission from first-episode ATPD, BPD, BLIPS, BIPS, and FES. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Independent extraction by multiple observers. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed, and moderators were tested with meta-regression analyses, Bonferroni corrected. Heterogeneity was assessed with the I2 index. Sensitivity analyses tested the robustness of the results. Publication bias was assessed with funnel plots and the Egger test. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Proportion of patients with baseline ATPD, BPD, BLIPS, and BIPS who had any psychotic recurrence at 6, 12, 24, and 36 or more months of follow-up. RESULTS: Eighty-two independent studies comprising up to 11,133 patients were included. There was no prognostic difference in risk of psychotic recurrence between ATPD, BPD, BLIPS, and BIPS at any follow-up (P > .03). In the long-term analysis, risk of psychotic recurrence (reported as mean [95% CI]) was significantly higher in the FES group (0.78 [0.58-0.93] at 24 months and 0.84 [0.70-0.94] at ≥ 36 months; P < .02 and P < .001, respectively) compared with the other 4 groups (0.39 [0.32-0.47] at 24 months and 0.51 [0.41-0.61] at ≥ 36 months). There were no publication biases. Sex and exposure to antipsychotic medication modulated the meta-analytical estimates (.002 < P < .03). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: There are no prognostic differences in risk of psychotic recurrence between ATPD, BPD, BLIPS, and BIPS constructs of brief psychotic episodes. Conversely, there is consistent meta-analytical evidence for better long-term prognosis of brief psychotic episodes compared with remitted first-episode schizophrenia. These findings should influence the diagnostic practice and clinical services in the management of early psychosis.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2015.2313

Cites

90 of 90 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. Jaspers K. General Psychopathology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press; 1963.
  2. Störring GE, Suchenwirth R, Völkel H. Emotionalität und cycloide Psychosen. Psychiatr Neurol Med Psychol (Leipz). 1962;14:85-97.
  3. Mitsuda H. Klinisch-erbbiologische Untersuchung der Schizophrenie [in Japanese with German abstract]. Psychiatr Neurol (Basel). 1942; 46:298-362.
  4. Jaspers K. Allgemeine Psychopathologie. Berlin, Germany: Springer; 1913.
  5. Wimmer A. Psykogene sindssygdomsformer. In: Wimmer A, ed. Jubilee Publication, St. Hans Hospital 1816-1916. Copenhagen, Denmark: Gad; 1916:85-216.
  6. Strömgren E. Psychogene Psychosen. Nervenarzt. 1986;57:88-95.
  7. Perris C, Brockington IF. Cycloid psychosis and their relation to the major psychosis. In: Perris C, Struwe D, Janson B, eds. Biological Psychiatry. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Elsevier; 1981:447-450.
  8. Staehelin JE. Zur Frage der Emotionspsy- chosen. Bull Schweiz Akad Med Wiss. 1946;2:121-130.
  9. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting: Meta-analysis Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA. 2000;283 (15):2008-2012.
  10. Riecher-Rössler A, Aston J, Ventura J, et al. The Basel Screening Instrument for Psychosis (BSIP): development, structure, reliability and validity [in German]. Fortschr Neurol Psychiatr. 2008;76(4): 207-216.
  11. Newcombe RG. Two-sided confidence intervals for the single proportion: comparison of seven methods. Stat Med. 1998;17(8):857-872.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fusar-Poli, P., Cappucciati, M., Bonoldi, I., Hui, L. M. C., Rutigliano, G., Stahl, D. R., Borgwardt, S., Politi, P., Mishara, A. L., Lawrie, S. M., Carpenter, W. T., & McGuire, P. K.
Affiliations
  • Department of Psychosis Studies, King’s College London, Institute of Psychiatry, London, England2OASIS Service, South London and the Maudsley National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, England3Department of Brain and Behavioral Sciences, University
  • King's College London (GB)
  • Department of Psychiatry, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China
  • University of Basel (CH)
  • University of Pavia (IT)
  • The Chicago School (US)
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
  • University of Maryland, Baltimore (US)
Venue
JAMA Psychiatry
Published
2016-03-01
Volume
73
Issue
3
Pages
211
ISSN
2168-622X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2233448021
Cited by
151
References
90
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 12
FWCI
3.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JAMA Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • CINECA IRIS Institutial research information system (University of Pisa) (submittedVersion)
  • The HKU Scholars Hub (University of Hong Kong) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and Depression
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Bipolar Disorder and Treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Keywords
acute and transient psychotic disorder, brief psychotic disorder, first-episode schizophrenia, prognosis, remission, first-episode psychosis, long-term follow-up, risk stratification, relapse prevention, antipsychotic drugs, family history of psychosis, social functioning
MeSH terms
Acute Disease, Adult, Diagnosis, Differential, Female, Humans, Male, Predictive Value of Tests, Prognosis, Psychotic Disorders, Recurrence, Schizophrenia, Schizophrenic Psychology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review