The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Psychotic-like experiences in the general population: characterizing a high-risk group for psychosis
Open accessAbstract
Recent research shows that psychotic symptoms, or psychotic-like experiences (PLEs), are reported not only by psychosis patients but also by healthy members of the general population. Healthy individuals who report these symptoms are considered to represent a non-clinical psychosis phenotype, and have been demonstrated to be at increased risk of schizophrenia-spectrum disorder. Converging research now shows that this non-clinical psychosis phenotype is familial, heritable and covaries with familial schizophrenia-spectrum disorder. A review of the research also shows that the non-clinical phenotype is associated extensively with schizophrenia-related risk factors, including social, environmental, substance use, obstetric, developmental, anatomical, motor, cognitive, linguistic, intellectual and psychopathological risk factors. The criterion and construct validity of the non-clinical psychosis phenotype with schizophrenia demonstrates that it is a valid population in which to study the aetiology of psychosis. Furthermore, it suggests shared genetic variation between the clinical and non-clinical phenotypes. Much remains to be learned about psychosis by broadening the scope of research to include the non-clinical psychosis phenotype.
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.
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
Kelleher, I., Harley, M., Murtagh, A., & Cannon, M. (2011) · Schizophrenia Bulletin · doi:10.1093/schbul/sbp057 · Cited by 352
Self-citationWelham, J., Scott, J., Williams, G., Najman, J., Bor, W., O'Callaghan, M., & McGrath, J. (2009) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291708003760 · Cited by 288
Wiles, N. J., Zammit, S., Bebbington, P., Singleton, N., Meltzer, H., & Lewis, G. (2006) · British Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1192/bjp.bp.105.012179 · Cited by 245
Harley, M., Kelleher, I., Clarke, M., Lynch, F., Arseneault, L., Connor, D., Fitzpatrick, C., & Cannon, M. (2010) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291709991966 · Cited by 206
Self-citation
Cited by
Teicher, M. H., Anderson, C. M., & Polcari, A. (2012) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1115396109 · Cited by 639
Arseneault, L., Cannon, M., Fisher, H. L., Polanczyk, G., Moffitt, T. E., & Caspi, A. (2011) · American Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2010.10040567 · Cited by 584
Self-citationFacial emotion processing in major depression: a systematic review of neuroimaging findings
Stuhrmann, A., Suslow, T., & Dannlowski, U. (2011) · Biology of Mood & Anxiety Disorders · doi:10.1186/2045-5380-1-10 · Cited by 440
Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., & van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2013) · Translational Psychiatry · doi:10.1038/tp.2013.34 · Cited by 383
Evidence of a dimensional relationship between schizotypy and schizophrenia: A systematic review
Nelson, M. T., Seal, M. L., Pantelis, C., & Phillips, L. J. (2013) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2013.01.004 · Cited by 334
Metadata
- Authors
- Kelleher, I., & Cannon, M.
- Venue
- Psychological Medicine
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2010-05-19
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-6
- ISSN
- 0033-2917 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-8978
- OpenAlex
- W2167339864
- Cited by
- 569
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 28.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Psychotic-like experiences in the general population: characterizing a high-risk group for psychosis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s0033291710001005
- The paper
- Kelleher, I., & Cannon, M. (2011). Psychotic-like experiences in the general population: characterizing a high-risk group for psychosis. Psychological Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033291710001005
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.