The DOI matches its Crossref record; 58 of the 59 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Deconstructing Pretest Risk Enrichment to Optimize Prediction of Psychosis in Individuals at Clinical High Risk
Open accessAbstract
IMPORTANCE: Pretest risk estimation is routinely used in clinical medicine to inform further diagnostic testing in individuals with suspected diseases. To our knowledge, the overall characteristics and specific determinants of pretest risk of psychosis onset in individuals undergoing clinical high risk (CHR) assessment are unknown. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the characteristics and determinants of pretest risk of psychosis onset in individuals undergoing CHR assessment and to develop and externally validate a pretest risk stratification model. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Clinical register-based cohort study. Individuals were drawn from electronic, real-world, real-time clinical records relating to routine mental health care of CHR services in South London and the Maudsley National Health Service Trust in London, United Kingdom. The study included nonpsychotic individuals referred on suspicion of psychosis risk and assessed by the Outreach and Support in South London CHR service from 2002 to 2015. Model development and validation was performed with machine-learning methods based on Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator for Cox proportional hazards model. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Pretest risk of psychosis onset in individuals undergoing CHR assessment. Predictors included age, sex, age × sex interaction, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, marital status, referral source, and referral year. RESULTS: A total of 710 nonpsychotic individuals undergoing CHR assessment were included. The mean age was 23 years. Three hundred ninety-nine individuals were men (56%), their race/ethnicity was heterogenous, and they were referred from a variety of sources. The cumulative 6-year pretest risk of psychosis was 14.55% (95% CI, 11.71% to 17.99%), confirming substantial pretest risk enrichment during the recruitment of individuals undergoing CHR assessment. Race/ethnicity and source of referral were associated with pretest risk enrichment. The predictive model based on these factors was externally validated, showing moderately good discrimination and sufficient calibration. It was used to stratify individuals undergoing CHR assessment into 4 classes of pretest risk (6-year): low, 3.39% (95% CI, 0.96% to 11.56%); moderately low, 11.58% (95% CI, 8.10% to 16.40%); moderately high, 23.69% (95% CI, 16.58% to 33.20%); and high, 53.65% (95% CI, 36.78% to 72.46%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Significant risk enrichment occurs before individuals are assessed for a suspected CHR state. Race/ethnicity and source of referral are associated with pretest risk enrichment in individuals undergoing CHR assessment. A stratification model can identify individuals at differential pretest risk of psychosis. Identification of these subgroups may inform outreach campaigns and subsequent testing and eventually optimize psychosis prediction.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
In the citing paper
“For example, it is apparent that unstructured recruitment processes and risk enrichment procedures in samples undergoing CHR-P assessment have a substantial role in determining the actual level of risk for psychosis in these individuals 107-109 , leading to underpowered and non-significant trials 95 .”
From Lack of evidence to favor specific preventive interventions in psychosis: a network meta‐analysis (2018) · cites this paper as [108]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso
Tibshirani, R. (1996) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1996.tb02080.x · Cited by 51,482
Nonparametric Estimation from Incomplete Observations
Kaplan, E. L., & Meier, P. (1992) · Springer series in statistics · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-4380-9_25 · Cited by 45,239
Nonparametric Estimation from Incomplete Observations
Kaplan, E. L., & Meier, P. (1958) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1958.10501452 · Cited by 39,158
Collins, G. S., Reitsma, J. B., Altman, D. G., & Moons, K. G. M. (2015) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.g7594 · Cited by 4,388
Collins, P. G. S., Reitsma, J. B., Altman, D. G., & Moons, K. G. M. (2015) · British Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1038/bjc.2014.639 · Cited by 3,319
Collins, G. S., Reitsma, J. B., Altman, D. G., & Moons, K. G. M. (2015) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/m14-0697 · Cited by 3,267
Analysis of probability as an aid in the clinical diagnosis of coronary artery disease.
Diamond, G. A., & Forrester, J. S. (1979) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm197906143002402 · Cited by 2,664
Fihn, S. D., Gardin, J. M., Abrams, J., Berra, K., Blankenship, J. C., Dallas, A. P., Douglas, P. S., Foody, J. M., Gerber, T. C., Hinderliter, A. L., et al. (2012) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0b013e3182776f83 · Cited by 2,419
Mapping the Onset of Psychosis: The Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental States
Yung, A. R., Yung, A. R., Yuen, H. P., McGorry, P. D., Phillips, L., Kelly, D., Dell’Olio, M., Francey, S. M., Cosgrave, E., Killackey, E. J., et al. (2005) · Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1080/j.1440-1614.2005.01714.x · Cited by 2,284
Fletcher, G. F., Ades, P. A., Kligfield, P., Arena, R., Balady, G. J., Bittner, V. A., Coke, L. A., Fleg, J. L., Forman, D. E., Gerber, T. C., et al. (2013) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0b013e31829b5b44 · Cited by 2,235
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Machine learning in mental health: a scoping review of methods and applications
Shatte, A. B. R., Hutchinson, D. M., & Teague, S. J. (2019) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291719000151 · Cited by 1,047
Improving outcomes of first‐episode psychosis: an overview
Fusar‐Poli, P., McGorry, P. D., & Kane, J. M. (2017) · World Psychiatry · doi:10.1002/wps.20446 · Cited by 575
Self-citationWhat causes psychosis? An umbrella review of risk and protective factors
Radua, J., Ramella‐Cravaro, V., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Reichenberg, A., Phiphopthatsanee, N., Amir, T., Yenn Thoo, H., Oliver, D., Davies, C., Morgan, C., et al. (2018) · World Psychiatry · doi:10.1002/wps.20490 · Cited by 553
Self-citationPreventive psychiatry: a blueprint for improving the mental health of young people
Fusar‐Poli, P., Correll, C. U., Arango, C., Berk, M., Patel, V., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2021) · World Psychiatry · doi:10.1002/wps.20869 · Cited by 497
Self-citationPrevention of Psychosis: Advances in Detection, Prognosis, and Intervention
Fusar-Poli, P., Salazar de Pablo, G., Correll, C. U., Meyer-Lindenberg, A., Millan, M. J., Borgwardt, S., Galderisi, S., Bechdolf, A., Pfennig, A., Kessing, L. V., et al. (2020) · JAMA Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2019.4779 · Cited by 476
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Fusar-Poli, P., Rutigliano, G., Stahl, D., Schmidt, A., Ramella-Cravaro, V., Hitesh, S., & McGuire, P.
- Affiliations
- King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology, and Neuroscience, London, United Kingdom2Outreach and Support in South London service, South London and the Maudsley National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
- University of Pisa (IT)
- King's College London (GB)
- King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology, and Neuroscience, London, United Kingdom4Department of Neurosciences, Psychology, Drug Research and Child Health, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
- South London and the Maudsley National Health Service Foundation Trust, Biomedical Research Centre Nucleus, London, United Kingdom
- Venue
- JAMA Psychiatry
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2016-12-01
- Volume
- 73
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1260
- ISSN
- 2168-622X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2541736368
- Cited by
- 121
- References
- 59
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 3
- FWCI
- 16.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- JAMA Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- edoc (University of Basel) (acceptedVersion)
- CINECA IRIS Institutial research information system (University of Pisa) (submittedVersion)
- Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- National Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and Depression
- National Institute for Health and Care Research
- King's College London
- Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
- Medical Research Council (MR/N026063/1)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Bipolar Disorder and Treatment
- Keywords
- psychosis onset prediction, clinical high risk, risk stratification model, race and ethnicity, referral sources, external validation, LASSO Cox regression, psychosis prevention, socioeconomic status, sex differences, sex-age interaction, mental health services
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, London, Male, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Psychotic Disorders, Referral and Consultation, Cohort Studies, Proportional Hazards Models, Risk Assessment, Young Adult
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
