The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Early intervention in psychosis: concepts, evidence and future directions
Open accessAbstract
The rise of the early intervention paradigm in psychotic disorders represents a maturing of the therapeutic approach in psychiatry, as it embraces practical preventive strategies which are firmly established in mainstream health care. Early intervention means better access and systematic early delivery of existing and incremental improvements in knowledge rather than necessarily requiring dramatic and elusive breakthroughs. A clinical staging model has proven useful and may have wider utility in psychiatry. The earliest clinical stages of psychotic disorder are non-specific and multidimensional and overlap phenotypically with the initial stages of other disorders. This implies that treatment should proceed in a stepwise fashion depending upon safety, response and progression. Withholding treatment until severe and less reversible symptomatic and functional impairment have become entrenched represents a failure of care. While early intervention in psychosis has developed strongly in recent years, many countries have made no progress at all, and others have achieved only sparse coverage. The reform process has been substantially evidence-based, arguably more so than other system reforms in mental health. However, while evidence is necessary, it is insufficient. It is also a by-product as well as a catalyst of reform. In early psychosis, we have also seen the evidence-based paradigm misused to frustrate overdue reform. Mental disorders are the chronic diseases of the young, with their onset and maximum impact in late adolescence and early adult life. A broader focus for early intervention would solve many of the second order issues raised by the early psychosis reform process, such as diagnostic uncertainty despite a clear-cut need for care, stigma and engagement, and should be more effective in mobilizing community support. Early intervention represents a vital and challenging project for early adopters in global psychiatry to consider.
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?
Clinical staging and early intervention have been proven to be valuable in other somatic (e.g. oncology) and mental (e.g. psychosis) disorders.
“It extends current research in the field of clinical staging and early intervention, which has been proven to be valuable in other somatic (e.g. oncology) [70] and mental (e.g. psychosis) disorders [71], to the domain of personality disorders.”
From The (cost-)effectiveness of early intervention (MBT-early) versus standard protocolized treatment (CBT) for emerging borderline personality disorder in adolescents (the EARLY study): a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial (2024) · cites this paper as [71]
For the psychosis claim attached to [71], the 'What is early intervention?' section says patients benefit from a broad, early focus on psychosis. But 'What is clinical staging?' describes the greater effectiveness of earlier-stage treatment as an assumption, while 'What are the potential benefits of staging?' presents staging as a framework for evaluating interventions. The paper therefore supports the value of early intervention in psychosis, but not the assertion that clinical staging has been proven valuable in psychosis. (LLM, conf=0.83)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 107 · Cited by 581
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Vos T, 2003, Victorian Burden of Disease Study: morbidity
- National Institute of Clinical Excellence., 2003, Schizophrenia: full national clinical guideline on core interventions in primary and secondary care
- 10.1111/j.1440-1614.2005.01516.x · DOI · Paper page
Metadata
- Authors
- MCGORRY, P. D., KILLACKEY, E., & YUNG, A.
- Affiliations
- Orygen (AU)
- Venue
- World Psychiatry
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-10
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 148-156
- ISSN
- 1723-8617 (ISSN-L)
- 2051-5545
- PMC
- PMC2559918
- OpenAlex
- W1590650015
- Cited by
- 581
- References
- 107
- Citations by year
- 2026: 32 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 47 · 2018: 33 · 2017: 40 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 36 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 25 · 2012: 25
- FWCI
- 21.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- World Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion)
- Deakin Research Online (Deakin University) (submittedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
- Keywords
- early intervention in psychosis, early psychosis, clinical staging model, stepwise treatment, mental health reform, evidence-based psychiatry, diagnostic uncertainty, stigma, patient engagement, community support, access to mental health care
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