Cited by 167Schizophrenia research and treatmentBipolar Disorder and TreatmentPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

Randomized-controlled trials in people at ultra high risk of psychosis: A review of treatment effectiveness

Preti, Antonio, Cella, Matteo·2010·Schizophrenia Research

Abstract

As an extension of the early intervention in psychosis paradigm, different focused treatments are now offered to individuals at ultra high risk of psychosis (UHR) to prevent transition to schizophrenia, however the effectiveness of these treatments is unclear. A systematic literature search in PubMed/Medline and PsycINFO was performed to derive information on randomized control trials (RCTs) in UHR samples. Seven reports were identified detailing results from five independent RCT studies. Two studies used antipsychotic drugs (one in combination with cognitive behavior therapy); one study employed cognitive therapy; one study used a two-year program of intensive community care with family psychoeducation; one study assessed the effectiveness of 3-months omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (Omega-3 PUFAs) supplementation. Intensive community care and the Omega-3 PUFAs supplementation were effective in reducing the transition to psychosis at 12 months. Overall, rates of transition to psychosis at 1 year were 11% for focused treatment groups (n=180) and 31.6% for control UHR groups (n=157). Receiving any of the focused treatment was associated with a lower risk of developing psychosis if compared with no treatment or treatment as usual (Relative Risk=0.36; 95%CI: 0.22-0.59). The available evidence at 2/3 years follow-up indicates that the effects of focused treatments are not stable after intervention cessation and when treatment is delivered over a restricted time (e.g. 6 months or less), it may achieve only a delay in psychosis onset. Due to the heterogeneity in the interventions considered, the current results do not allow recommendation for any specific treatment.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.schres.2010.07.026

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Preti, A., & Cella, M.
Affiliations
King's College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Preti, Antonio
Venue
Schizophrenia Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-10
Volume
123
Issue
1
Pages
30-36
ISSN
0920-9964 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2096616288
Cited by
167
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 27 · 2012: 30
FWCI
3.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Schizophrenia Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • UNICA IRIS Institutional Research Information System (University of Cagliari) (submittedVersion)
  • Institutional Research Information System University of Turin (University of Turin) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
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 › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Keywords
early intervention in psychosis
MeSH terms
Olanzapine, Benzodiazepines, Humans, Psychotic Disorders, Antipsychotic Agents, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome

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